Sheffield City Council (202322333)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202322333

Sheffield City Council

11 July 2025


Our approach

What we can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction and is governed by the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. The Ombudsman must determine whether a complaint comes within their jurisdiction. The Ombudsman seeks to resolve disputes wherever possible but cannot investigate complaints that fall outside of this.

In deciding whether a complaint falls within their jurisdiction, the Ombudsman will carefully consider all the evidence provided by the parties and the circumstances of the case.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of Antisocial Behaviour (ASB) from her neighbour.

Determination (jurisdictional decision)

  1. When a complaint is brought to the Ombudsman, we must consider all the circumstances of the case as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.
  2. After carefully considering all of the evidence, in accordance with paragraph 25 and 41.a of the Scheme, the complaint, as set out above, is not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction to consider.

Background

  1. The resident was a secure tenant of the landlord, a local authority, between 2002 and 2018. The property is a 3-bedroom, semi-detached house. On 26 November 2018 the resident obtained full ownership of the property, having purchased it from the landlord.
  2. Between November 2021 and 3 July 2023 the resident repeatedly informed the landlord that her neighbour, a tenant of the landlord, was causing noise nuisance through the night. The landlord undertook various interventions to address this.
  3. On 3 July 2023 the resident raised a complaint. She said she was unhappy with the landlord’s handling of her reports of ASB, which were continuing. The resident informed the landlord that she was not a council tenant.
  4. The landlord issued a stage 1 complaint response on 5 October 2023. It said it had followed procedures in its contact with the resident. It acknowledged there had been some delays in responding to her.
  5. The resident escalated her complaint on 19 October 2023. She said she felt the landlord had provided a false and misleading account. She said the landlord had made a mistake with dates, the neighborhood officer did not attend when expected and did not provide updates. She was unhappy that her case was closed due to lack of evidence.
  6. The landlord issued its final response on 15 November 2023. It apologised for some incorrect and lacking information. It also apologised for missed appointments and lack of contact. Despite this, it reiterated its position at stage 1 and confirmed that, overall, the case was managed in line with procedure.
  7. In June 2025 the resident told this Service that the situation had improved. Her neighbour had occasionally caused noise nuisance but had apologised. She said that the landlord was in contact with her fortnightly and this was reflected in her neighbour’s behaviour. She is worried about a recurrence of the issue.

Reasons

  1. Paragraph 25.a of the Scheme outlines people who can use the Scheme. It states:

25. the following people can make complaints to the Ombudsman about members:

a) a person who is or has been in a landlord/tenant relationship with a member. This includes people who have a lease, tenancy, licence to occupy, service agreement or other arrangement to occupy premises owned or managed by a member. If the complaint is made by an ex-occupier, they must have had a legal relationship with the member at the time that the matter complained of arose.

  1. Paragraph 41.a of the Scheme states:

41. the Ombudsman cannot consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion:

a) were not referred to the Ombudsman by one of the people who can use the Scheme under paragraph 25.

  1. In July 2025 the landlord provided Land Registry information to this Service which confirmed that the resident took full ownership of the property on 26 November 2018. The resident holds an absolute title for the property as a freeholder. As a freeholder of the property, there is no arrangement or contract (such as a lease or tenancy) to occupy a property owned by the member landlord.
  2. Accordingly, although the landlord is a member of the Scheme, it does not have a landlord/tenant relationship with the resident. This Service is not able to investigate and find a determination in this case, because, as an owner of her property, the complainant does not meet the resident condition as outlined in the Scheme.