Peabody Trust (202304471)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202304471

Peabody Trust

25 November 2024

 

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration,’ for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice, or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman, and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
    1. Reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB).
    2. Complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord, and her tenancy began on 28 March 2017. The landlord is a housing association. The resident lives in the property with her daughter. The property is a 2-bedroom flat.
  2. Throughout her complaint to the landlord, the resident reported ASB from her neighbour in the above flat. On 14 April 2023, the resident reported verbal abuse from her neighbour and threats to kill on a regular basis. In June 2023, she completed and submitted diary incident sheets and recordings of ASB to her landlord.
  3. On 3 June 2023, the resident made a complaint to the landlord. She complained the landlord had failed to respond to her reports of ASB.
  4. On 8 June 2023, the landlord replied and advised it could not consider the resident’s complaint as she had not been through its ASB process. The landlord said on 16 April 2023, it had asked the resident to keep a diary of incidents. However, the landlord had not received a copy. The landlord asked the resident to keep a diary of incidents covering 2 weeks and provide it so it could be reviewed and action taken.
  5. The resident referred her complaint to this service on 22 June 2023 and we asked it to provide its stage 1 complaint response. On the same day, the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint acknowledgement letter.
  6. On 4 July 2023, the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. The landlord said:
    1. The resident had reported the ASB incidents to the local authority, police, her GP, her child’s school and sought advice from Citizen Advice Bureau.
    2. The resident advised the ongoing ASB had caused her a great deal of stress, it was affecting her sleep and giving her anxiety attacks.
    3. The resident said that she wanted the person responsible for the ASB to be dealt with and for them to sign an ASB agreement. Further, the resident sought compensation for the stress it had caused her.
    4. The resident had provided recordings to the landlord but had not had a response.
    5. An ASB case was opened after the resident provided copies of the diary sheets on the 12 June 2023.
    6. During a call on 19 June 2023, it was agreed that the resident would keep diary notes of further incidents and send it every two weeks. Further, the landlord would speak to the neighbour. The landlord would contact the police for a disclosure of incidents and contact the resident every 14 days to see if the issue had improved.
    7. It had previously completed a risk and vulnerability assessment, which came out as high risk. The landlord apologised that it had not made an offer of support at the time.
    8. It had arranged to contact the resident to provide a case update, discuss any support needs and arrange collection of any further evidence.
    9. It was offering compensation of £150 for its service failings.
  7. On 17 July 2023, emails were exchanged between the landlord and the resident. She confirmed she wished to escalate her complaint to stage 2.
  8. On 22 August 2023, the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. The landlord said:
    1. It was unable to reimburse the resident for equipment she had purchased to record evidence of ASB. She had not sought its agreement to reimburse her in advance.
    2. It would provide internal feedback regarding the time it took to make initial contact with the resident, not offering or referring the resident for support regarding her stress. and about the arrangements not being made to gather her recorded evidence.
    3. It apologised that the resident had felt forced to approach the Ombudsman for help in having her complaint logged. Further, it apologised for the delay in providing its stage 2 complaint response. The landlord offered a further £75 in compensation in recognition of this.
  9. On 29 August 2023, as the resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s complaint response, she referred her complaint to this service. She disagreed with the landlord’s findings that she did not have sufficient evidence to support her reports of ASB.
  10. On the 8 April 2024, the resident emailed this service advising the ASB issue had not been resolved and was negatively impacting her physical and mental health. In a call with this service, the resident requested the landlord would resolve the ASB from her neighbour.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. In a call with this service, the resident stated that she wished to be rehoused as an outcome of her complaint. The resident has been advised it is not within this service’s jurisdiction to determine whether the landlord should rehouse a resident. The Ombudsman can consider how a landlord managed the resident’s concerns. It can also consider whether the landlord has followed a fair process in considering the resident’s concerns relating to their complaint. The Ombudsman however does not have the powers to instruct a landlord to allocate housing as a resolution to a complaint.
  2. The resident stated that the ASB and the landlord’s handling of her complaints negatively impacted her health and her relationship with her daughter. While the Ombudsman does not dispute this, it is beyond the expertise of this service to determine a causal link between the landlord’s actions (or inaction) and the impact on the resident’s health. Such a determination is more appropriate through an insurance claim or by a court. Should the resident wish to pursue a claim relating to the impact on her and her family’s health, she has the option to seek legal advice.

The landlord’s obligations

  1. The landlord’s ASB policy says it will use a range of preventative measures including early intervention, signposting to mediation services and legal action to tackle ASB.
  2. The landlord’s ASB policy says it will assess the risk and vulnerability of residents who report ASB. This is to identify any safeguarding issues and ensure the appropriate level of support can be provided.
  3. Further, the landlord’s ASB policy says it will agree an action plan with the complainant and keep them informed of the actions it takes. Additionally, it will provide support and advice to victims and witnesses of ASB and refer them to external agencies where appropriate.
  4. The landlord’s complaint policy says it will not deal with the first reports of ASB or ongoing nuisance as part of an existing ASB case through its complaints procedure. The landlord’s complaint policy says only complaints regarding its handling of an existing ASB case will be logged as a complaint.
  5. The landlord has a 2 stage complaints process. It says it will log a new complaint within 5 working days of receipt. The landlord aims to issue a stage 1 complaint response within 10 working days and a stage 2 complaint within 20 working days. If an extension is required, the landlord will contact the resident providing an explanation and a timeframe for when a response will be issued. An extension should not exceed more than 10 working days without good reason. The landlord says if an extension beyond 10 working days is required, it should be agreed by both parties.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s ASB reports

  1. The landlord’s policy says it will agree an action plan with the resident and keep them informed of any action it takes. While this service has not seen evidence, the landlord acknowledges the resident first reported ASB in April 2023. However, documents provided by the resident states she first reported ASB to her landlord in December 2022. Additionally, the resident provided letters showing she contacted her GP in December 2022 regarding ASB from her neighbour. The resident states she provided a copy of this letter to the landlord.
  2. The landlord’s ASB policy states it will respond to reports of ASB within 2 working days. While it has not seen evidence, the landlord’s stage 1 complaint response said it requested the resident to record diary incident sheets for a period of 2 weeks and submit these. The resident has provided this service a copy of an email sent to the landlord on 19 April 2023. She advised she had issues editing the diary sheets but stated she did not receive a reply from her landlord. This service would expect a landlord to provide diary sheets and explain to residents how to edit and make submissions on the diary sheets.  Further, due to alleged threats and verbal abuse received by the resident, this service would expect a landlord to open an investigation into the ASB. However, this service has not seen evidence the landlord opened an investigation apart from requested the resident complete the diary incident sheets. This is not what would be expected of a landlord.
  3. The landlord has not demonstrated it created a completed an initial risk assessment when it became aware of the reports. The landlord’s ASB policy commits to carrying out a risk assessment and it would be appropriate to do this at the earliest opportunity. Had it done so, it would have assisted the landlord in determining whether the resident or her family were at the risk of harm or required support. An action plan was not agreed between the parties, or a risk assessment was not completed until after a call between the parties on 19 June 2023. It is not reasonable for a landlord to wait for 2 months after the first report before undertaking a risk assessment. Additionally, as the resident had made the landlord aware the ASB was having a negative impact on her sleep and mental health, it should have offered the resident support earlier. Due to the nature of the reports made by the resident, it would be expected for the landlord to act more urgently to investigate the resident’s reports of ASB. Had it done so, it would have allowed the creation of an action plan to list how it would address the resident’s reports of ASB at the earliest opportunity.
  4. In its correspondence and action plan, the landlord stated that it contacted the resident every 14 days regarding her ASB report. This service has seen evidence that the landlord contacted the resident to discuss her recordings and diary sheets. It explained there was insufficient evidence to act. Additionally, the landlord approached and discussed the reports with the alleged perpetrator and other residents who disputed the resident’s assertions. The landlord has not demonstrated whether this was discussed this with the resident. The resident did provide a partial email showing the landlord had considered the resident’s rehousing request, but based on the information and evidence provided it could not proceed with the request. This was reasonable from the landlord.
  5. The landlord in its stage 2 complaint response, acknowledged it did not make the appropriate arrangements to collect the resident’s recorded evidence. This delayed it in receiving and reviewing the resident’s evidence and considering the use of early interventions, in keep with its ASB policy.
  6. In its stage 1 response, the landlord did acknowledge that it did not offer or refer the resident to support for the mental health issues she experienced because of the ASB. Further communication between the parties, show the landlord did make a referral to the resident to a support service. However, it took until 3 months after her first ASB report to do this. The landlord’s ASB policy says it will refer resident to external agencies were appropriate, however it was not reasonable for the landlord to take more than 3 months to make a referral for the resident after she had raised reports of ASB.
  7. When escalating her complaint, the resident sought reimbursement for the equipment she purchased to record ASB and noise nuisance. The landlord advised it would not offer reimbursement as it had not discussed or agreed to the resident purchasing noise monitoring equipment. This was reasonable by the landlord as no agreement was made prior to the resident purchasing equipment. However, the landlord should have considered installation of its own noise monitoring equipment to assist the resident in gathering evidence. There is no evidence this was considered by the landlord.
  8. While the landlord acknowledged and apologised for its handling of the resident’s report, this service believes the compensation offered does not reflect the failings identified in this report. Therefore, having considered the evidence, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s ASB reports. An order for further compensation is made below to reflect the identified failings in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaints

  1. The Ombudsman’s complaint handling code (the Code) expects landlords to acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days. It then expects a landlord to issue its stage 1 complaint response within 10 working days. While the Code expects landlords to issue stage 2 complaint within 20 working days.
  2. On 3 June 2023, the resident emailed the landlord seeking to make a formal complaint. On 8 June 2023, the landlord replied and advised it could not accept the complaint as she had not been through the ASB process. While the landlord’s complaint says it will not log the resident’s first reports of ASB as a complaint. However, this was not the resident’s first report of ASB. She had previously reported ASB from her neighbour in April 2023. Section 2.1 of the Code says landlords must accept a complaint unless there is a valid reason not to do so. It was unreasonable for the landlord not to log a complaint as the resident stated her complaint concerned the landlord’s handling of her complaint and she had made previous reports of ASB.
  3. The resident escalated her complaint on the 13 July 2023. The landlord did not acknowledge the complaint until 24 July 2023. The Code and the landlord’s policy expects it to acknowledge a complaint within 5 working days. The complaint acknowledgement was issued 7 working days after her complaint escalation request. No reasons have been provided for the delay.
  4. Additionally, the landlord’s complaint policy and the Code says it should issue a stage 2 complaint response within 20 working days. The deadline for the landlord to provide a response would have been 10 August 2023. If an extension is required, the landlord’s policy says it will contact the resident. On 14 August 2023, the landlord emailed the resident apologising for the delay in its response. It advised this was due to an error with the deadline being set from when it acknowledged the resident’s complaint.
  5. A landlord may incorrectly record a date in its records, however when it identifies this issue, it should rectify and apologise to the resident. It did do this in its email on 14 August 2023. While extensions to a complaint response may be required, it is not reasonable to set false expectations. The landlord advised it would respond by the 18 August 2023. However, the landlord failed to meet this date and advised this was due to IT issues. The stage 2 complaint was not issued until 22 August 2024. This was 28 working days after the resident sought to escalate her complaint.
  6. Having considered the available evidence, the landlord acknowledged and apologised for its handling of the resident’s complaint. In its stage 2 complaint response, the landlord offered compensation totalling £75 for its complaint handling. This was £25 for the delays at stage 2 and £50 for the failure to log her original complaint leading the resident to contact this service. The Ombudsman believes the offer made was adequate. Therefore, the Ombudsman finds there was reasonable redress by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of ASB.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53 of the Scheme, there was reasonable redress by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Order

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident a total of £425 composed of:
      1. The £225 offered during its internal complaints process.
      2. A further £200 for its handling of the resident’s reports of ASB.
  2. The compensation must be paid directly to the resident and the landlord must provide this service with evidence of payment within 4 weeks of the date of this determination.
  3. Within 4 weeks of this report, the landlord is ordered to conduct a review of the resident’s ASB case and consider whether it can offer any further support to the resident, including the gathering of evidence concerning her ASB reports. Within 15 working days of this review, the landlord is to write to the resident with the outcome. A copy of this letter should be forwarded to this service.

Recommendation

  1. The Ombudsman recommends that the landlord contacts the resident to discuss rehousing options available to her given the resident has stated she wants to move properties.

 

Chat to us