From 13 January 2026, we will no longer accept new case enquiries by email. Please use our online complaint form to bring a complaint to us. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Other ways to contact us.

Royal Borough Of Greenwich (202414386)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202414386

Royal Borough Of Greenwich

19 September 2025

 

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 reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB).
  2. The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident is a leaseholder of the landlord, a local council. He lives in a 3-bedroom ground floor property.
  2. In April 2023 the resident reported an issue with ASB. He said that the property above him was converted to temporary accommodation to house council tenants. However, the person living above him was very noisy and there had been a confrontation between this person and his guests.
  3. In January 2024 the resident raised a formal complaint. He said that the landlord had not dealt with the issue of noise or accusations made by the neighbour that he was a bully and was racist. The landlord responded on 19 February 2024 at stage 1 of its complaint process. It said:
    1. it had already contacted the neighbour to remind them not to cause nuisance, and to keep to the terms of the tenancy agreement
    2. it met with the resident and the neighbour, the neighbour denied the ASB allegations
    3. it was sorry the resident was experiencing noise nuisance and any distress this had caused
    4. it would not move the neighbour, but would continue to monitor the situation
    5. the complaint was not upheld
  4. The resident escalated the complaint in March 2024, and the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 15 July 2024. It said:
    1. the neighbour denied the allegations
    2. while it understood the resident’s concerns, he was aware the neighbour lived with 2 young children, one of which was a young baby – therefore, it was possible that excess foot traffic in the property was the cause of the noise
    3. its Environmental Health Team was contacted about the case, but the team decided not to take the reports forward because it was not satisfied the noise was a statutory nuisance
    4. the noises heard were day-to-day impact noises
    5. the resident should continue to report future concerns by keeping a log of incidents and using its noise recording app
    6. it would continue to monitor and work with the neighbour to ensure they were keeping to their tenancy agreement
    7. it could offer mediation if the resident wanted to accept this
    8. the complaint was not upheld, and the resident could contact his GP or the Samaritans for support
  5. The resident referred his complaint to us in July 2024. He has told us the noise issue is still ongoing. To resolve the complaint he wants the noise issue to be resolved.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. We understand that there is a long history of ASB reports by the resident. However, this investigation has focussed on the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports from April 2023. This is because we can only investigate issues that have exhausted the landlord’s complaint procedure. The resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s handling of ASB reports from April 2023. Therefore, it would be unfair if we investigated the landlord’s actions before this date.

Handling of ASB

  1. In cases relating to ASB, it is not the Ombudsman’s role to decide whether ASB occurred or who is responsible. The Ombudsman can assess how a landlord has dealt with reports it has received in the timeframe of a complaint. We can assess whether the landlord has followed proper procedure, good practice, and behaved reasonably, taking account of all the circumstances of the case.
  2. The landlord’s ASB policy defines ASB behaviour as “behaviour that is capable of causing a nuisance, annoyance, alarm or distress to any person living in, working in or visiting the neighbourhood”.
  3. It’s policy says that this includes:
    1. noise Nuisance – including loud parties, shouting, and noise from TVs, radios, hi-fis, musical instruments and burglar alarms
    2. verbal Abuse – including offensive language and unreasonable or unfounded allegations
  4. On 30 April 2023 the resident reported a confrontation between him, his guest and the neighbour. He said that the neighbour was abusive, used explicit language, and called him a racist. The resident chased the landlord for a response to this report on 10, 16 and 17 May 2023.
  5. The report made by the resident meets the landlord’s definition of ASB. Its ASB policy says it will acknowledge a report within 5 working days. It will then assess the problem and decide what action to take. There is no evidence the landlord responded to the resident. This was unreasonable. It caused the resident distress and inconvenience.
  6. As he did not receive a response from the landlord the resident emailed his MP. Following this on 17 October 2023 the landlord asked the resident if he would like to meet to discuss the issues. It said that it would meet with the neighbour on 24 October to discuss the allegations made including an issue with noise.
  7. While the decision to offer the resident a meeting to discuss the outstanding issues was reasonable, it took the landlord 6 months from the April 2023 report to take any action. This was an unreasonable delay and caused the resident further distress and inconvenience.
  8. The landlord updated the resident on 26 October 2023 about its visit to the neighbour. It said that it had discussed the concerns and asked the neighbour to move furniture and put rugs down to try and alleviate the noise. It reminded the neighbour to be mindful of noise late in the evening. It was positive that the landlord updated the resident proactively after the meeting.
  9. The resident made a report about unreasonable noise on 27 October 2023. There is no evidence to show the landlord acknowledged this within its ASB policy timescales. This was unreasonable and increased the distress felt by the resident.
  10. On 10 November 2023 the resident reported a further noise issue and chased the landlord for a response to his email sent on 26 and 27 October 2023. He made a further report about noise on 12 November 2023. The landlord arranged a meeting to take place on 17 November 2023 to discuss the ASB reports.
  11. While it was positive the landlord was available to discuss the issue in the November 2023 meeting, this was 7 months after the original ASB report in April 2023. The landlord has not provided evidence that within these 7 months it:
    1. agreed an action plan with the resident and confirmed this in writing
    2. discussed the likely outcome of various forms of action
    3. regularly reviewed the case
    4. completed a risk assessment
    5. discussed with the resident:
      1. what happened (including dates and times)
      2. what caused the issue
      3. what action the resident had taken
      4. whether the resident had discussed matters with the police or other third parties
  12. All the actions listed above are steps the landlord’s ASB policy says it will take when dealing with reports of ASB. The failure to do this between April and November 2023 was unreasonable. This was a missed opportunity to help the resident and neighbour resolve the issues raised. It showed a lack of ownership of the issue and caused unnecessary distress and inconvenience to the resident.
  13. The resident and landlord met on 17 November 2023. However, the landlord has not provided any evidence to show it recorded what was discussed at this meeting. There are no written action plans or notes of the meeting. This lack of record keeping means the landlord has not been able to show what steps it took, if any, to resolve the resident’s concerns. It is important to keep robust records and log each contact in a way that can be shared and accessed when needed.
  14. On 7 January 2024 the resident raised his complaint. He outlined the landlord’s failure to respond to his 30 April 2023 ASB report. He explained that he contacted the council’s Environmental Health team about the noise, but it could not deal with the issue as it said the noise was “normal living” noise. However, his view was that the noise was excessive and continued until the early hours of the morning. The landlord acknowledged this complaint.
  15. While waiting for a complaint response the resident made 2 further reports of excessive noise on 14 and 18 February 2024. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 19 February 2024, but there was no acknowledgement of the new ASB reports. This did not align with its ASB policy which says it will “deal with all complaints fairly and impartially”. This caused the resident some further distress.
  16. The resident made further reports of ASB on:
    1. 25 March 2024
    2. 7 April 2024
    3. 14 April 2024
    4. 15 April 2024
    5. 21 April 2024
    6. 12 May 2024
    7. 19 May 2024
    8. 3 June 2024
  17. The landlord failed to acknowledge or take any action that aligned with its ASB policy in relation to any of these reports. This was unreasonable and further increased the residents distress.
  18. The resident made a further ASB report on 12 June 2024. The landlord acknowledged this on 13 June 2024 and said it had passed the information to its Temporary Accommodation Team to investigate. Between 13 and 25 June 2024 the landlord discussed internally what actions it could take to assist the resident. On 25 June 2024 it contacted the resident and offered to arrange mediation.
  19. The offer of mediation was made 14 months after the original ASB report made by the resident. The resident refused this offer of mediation as he felt his relationship with his neighbour had irrevocably broken down. Despite this refusal it was reasonable for the landlord to make this offer. This aligned with its ASB policy as an action that could be taken to resolve issues of noise.
  20. While it was reasonable for the landlord to make the offer of mediation in line with its policy, it is unclear why it took 14 months to reach this stage. Mediation is often best suited as an early step to resolve issues to try and stop escalation. The landlord has provided no evidence to show it considered mediation as an early step. The lack of clear action plans and risk assessments may have contributed to the failure to deal with the ASB issue effectively.
  21. The resident reported further issues with ASB on 5 and 7 July 2024. Again, there is no evidence the landlord acknowledged or acted on these reports of ASB in line with its policy. This was distressing for the resident.
  22. In summary, the landlord failed to follow its own ASB policy when dealing with the resident’s reports. It failed to acknowledge many of the reports, there is no evidence to show it, agreed an action plan, conducted a risk assessment, regularly reviewed the case or clearly discussed with the resident what evidence it needed to act against the neighbour.
  23. Taking all the circumstances into account there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB. Where there has been a failure which adversely affected the resident, our guidance suggests a payment of between £100 to £600 compensation is proportionate.
  24. The landlord’s complaint responses did not recognise any failings. This is despite clear failings identified as part of this investigation. In both its complaint responses it did not acknowledge the resident’s report from 30 April 2023 and its failure to act on this. Even if the landlord did not consider the noise to be statutory nuisance, the resident consistently reported that noise was ongoing until midnight or 1am. This would meet the landlord’s own definition of ASB as set out in its policy. This would have added to the resident’s distress.
  25. The resident told us that he has felt unsupported by the landlord. The resident’s formal complaints highlighted these feelings. In this case the landlord’s failures were ongoing over a long time (over 15 months). Given the length of time the failures lasted we consider a payment of £500 in compensation is fair to recognise the impact on the resident.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaint policy at the time said that it would respond at stage 1 of its process within 15 working days, and stage 2 of its process within 20 working days.
  2. The resident raised his formal complaint on 7 January 2024. The landlord failed to respond within its stated timescales. Additionally, its policy says that where it cannot respond within its timescales it will contact the resident and explain why. However, it took the resident chasing the landlord on 6 February 2024 before the landlord told the resident the response would be delayed due to high volumes. The response was provided on 19 February 2024 which was 35 working days after the complaint was raised. This was unreasonable and caused the resident some inconvenience.
  3. The resident escalated his complaint on 4 March 2024. The resident chased for a stage 2 response:
    1. 7 April 2024
    2. 14 April 2024
    3. 15 April 2024
    4. 3 June 2024
    5. 5 July 2024
  4. The landlord told the resident the complaint response was delayed due to high volumes on 17 April 2024. However, no further updates were provided to explain why there was a delayed response. The landlord responded at stage 2 on 15 July 2024 which was 92 working days after the escalation. This was unreasonable and caused the resident some distress and inconvenience.
  5. Taking all the circumstances into account this amounts to maladministration. The landlord did not review its own complaint handling in its stage 2 complaint response. However, our guidance says that where there is a failure which adversely impacts a resident a payment of between £100 to £600 is appropriate.
  6. In this instance, the time taken to provide the complaint responses was unreasonable. The landlord did not proactively explain the reasons for any delays to the resident. And the resident had to chase several times for a response. Therefore, we consider a payment of £200 is fair to recognise the distress and inconvenience this caused. This amount also recognises that once the complaint response was sent, any impact of the delays ended.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of:
    1. the resident’s reports of ASB
    2. the associated complaint

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
    1. write an apology to the resident for its failings and send a copy to us
    2. pay the resident £700 compensation and provide evidence that this has been paid – the compensation is broken down as:
      1. £500 for the impact to the resident of its ASB handling
      2. £200 for the impact to the resident of its complaint handling
    3. contact the resident to arrange a discussion either in person, or over the phone regarding the ongoing noise issue, and provide us with evidence a discussion has been arranged
  2. Within 6 weeks of the date of this report, or following the discussion the landlord should write to the resident and the Service with an action plan which must set out:
    1. a point of contact for the resident
    2. an ASB case reference number or similar that the resident can use when communicating with the landlord
    3. the specific actions the landlord will take
    4. any actions the resident will take
    5. a timeframe to complete the actions
    6. a timeframe for when a review of the case will happen
    7. an agreement of how often the landlord will write to the resident
    8. an agreement of how often the resident will provide evidence of ASB and the methods of reporting
    9. what the likely outcomes may be