Southend on Sea City Council (202414266)

Background

1. The resident had a secure tenancy with the landlord. She had lived in the 1-bedroom flat since 2022. The resident told the landlord she wanted to move following incidents of antisocial behaviour (ASB).

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
   1. the resident’s request to move home due to antisocial behaviour (ASB)
   2. the associated complaint

Our decision (determination)

3. We have found no maladministration in relation to the landlord’s handling of the resident’s request to move home due to antisocial behaviour.
4. We have found service failure in relation to the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

5. The landlord followed its policies and procedures relating to management moves.  It advised the resident correctly that the local authority managed housing allocations. This was appropriate in the circumstances.
6. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response was delayed and was not in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code. It did not acknowledge the delay, and this was a failure in service to the resident.

Putting things right

Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Orders

Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

What we found and why

The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.

7. On 8 August 2023 the resident told the landlord that she had “literally pleaded to move…even reapplying to the “on the move” register again due to the decline in my health / welfare conditions and being exacerbated by living in constant stress and fear…there has not even been a confirmation of my email…and I wish this to be logged as an official complaint.”
8. On 25 September 2023, the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response.  It said it did not want to see the resident move from her home and advised:
   1. any person was eligible to make a housing register application to the local authority. Consideration will be in accordance with the local authority housing allocating policy, and the landlord had no involvement in that
   2. it could consider a management move for the resident and there was a requirement for supporting evidence (where there was a criminal incident) from a Sergeant or above within the police…if approved one offer of a like for like property would be made. If refused, no other offer would be made
   3. a mutual exchange between 2 tenants with the landlord approval. Homeswapper was a mutual exchange service to identify and pursue a suitable exchange.
9. On 2 October 2023 the resident told the landlord she was not satisfied with the decision and was escalating the complaint.  She said her housing application had gone in “months ago due to a change in circumstances in medical/welfare needs…you are still unsympathetic to my suffering and refuse to be supportive in my banding bidding allocations. I find it impossible to believe that you in extreme cases have no influence…to the local authority.” Complaints about health and/or welfare-based transfer requests are within the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman’s remit.
10. On 23 October 2023, the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It said:
    1. it agreed with the advice provided in its stage 1 complaint response
    2. a management move could only be considered in cases of immediate and high risk and only with the support of the police. This would be a like for like move and unlikely to facilitate a move to a one bed bungalow as it recognised the resident would prefer
    3. it encouraged the resident to look for a mutual exchange on “homeswapper” and it would be happy to help set up an account if the resident thought that would be helpful
11. The resident told this Service that she had moved home after the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response.
12. The landlord followed its management move policy and contacted the police about supporting a move, which they did not. It offered help with a homeswapper account and correctly stated that the local authority managed housing allocations, and it was outside of its control. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the move request following incidents of ASB.

13. On 8 August 2023 the resident told the landlord she wished to make a complaint.
14. On 9 August 2023 the landlord acknowledged the complaint and would contact her within 10 working days once investigations were complete.
15. On 18 September 2023, the landlord contacted the resident and said we “acknowledge receipt of your recent stage 1 complaint received on 14 September 2023.” But this Service has not seen any evidence to show the resident raised her complaint again on this date. This is unreasonable in the circumstances because it had already acknowledged the complaint made by the resident on 8 August 2023.
16. On 25 September 2023 the landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response. This was 35 working days from the resident raising her complaint on 8 August 2023. This was unreasonable in the circumstances because it was not in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code.
17. On 2 October 2023 the resident told the landlord she was unsatisfied with the outcome and escalated her complaint.
18. On 3 October 2023, the landlord acknowledged the escalation of the resident’s complaint, and she would receive a response by 31 October 2023.
19. On 23 October 2023, the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response.  This was 16 working days after the escalation request and was reasonable in the circumstances.
20. But the landlord was delayed in its complaint handling at stage 1, and it did not apply its own policies and procedures.  The landlord did not acknowledge the delay. This was a failure in the service provided to the resident.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

21. As mentioned in this report; there were 2 acknowledgements to the resident’s stage 1 complaint. The landlord should assure itself that its processes are sufficient to correctly identify and record complaints.

Communication

22. There were some gaps in communication identified. The landlord should ensure all staff are aware of the landlord’s policies and procedures for service level agreements for responding to residents.
23. The landlord should also ensure its staff are aware of its complaint handling obligations in line with the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code. A recommendation has been made relating to this.