Southern Housing (202510450)

Back to Top

 

Decision

Case ID

202510450

Decision type

Investigation

Landlord

Southern Housing

Landlord type

Housing Association

Occupancy

Assured Tenancy

Date

19 December 2025

Background

  1. The resident lives in a block of flats. She has mental health vulnerabilities which the landlord is aware of. She complained about how the landlord handled her reports of a cannabis smell in the block.

What the complaint is about

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. Reports of cannabis use.
    2. The complaint.

Our decision (determination)

  1. There was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of cannabis use.
  2. There was reasonable redress in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

We have not made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

  1. The landlord acted in line with its anti-social behaviour (ASB) policy in place at the time of the complaint.
  2. The landlord acknowledged the delays in its handling of the complaint. It apologised and offered redress in line with our remedies guidance.

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.

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations

If it has not already done so, the landlord should pay the resident the £100 as agreed in the complaint response for the delay sending the letter.

If it has not already done so, the landlord should pay the resident the £100 as agreed in the complaint response. Our finding of reasonable redress for its complaint handling is made on the basis that this compensation is paid to the resident.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date

What happened

20 April 2023

The resident complained to the landlord about a lack of action to her repeated reports of cannabis use in the block.

28 April 2023

The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response. It said its policy required the resident to report cannabis use to the police and keep an incident log. It referred to a previous complaint and that it agreed to remind all residents that smoking cannabis breaches the terms of the tenancy. The letter was sent out on 14 April 2023. It also promised ad-hoc visits in May 2023 to monitor the situation.

15 May 2023

The resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint. She wanted to know why she had to complain before it acted. She also asked why a letter had still not been sent to the block. She wanted future reports handled through the ASB pathway and letters issued to all residents.

5 September 2023

The landlord held a stage 2 review meeting. It said it followed policy by asking the resident to report cannabis use to police and keep a log. It repeated the block letter was sent on 14 April 2023. The resident agreed the situation had improved.

19 September 2023

The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident. It acknowledged its poor handling of the stage 2 complaint and apologised for the delay in sending the block letter. It also explained why it directed her to the police to report cannabis issues. It agreed the resident could use the ASB pathway for future reports. It also promised unannounced visits to the block over the next four weeks to monitor the situation. It offered £200 compensation comprising:

  1. £100 for the delay sending the block letter.
  2. £100 for the delay and management of the stage 2 complaint.

Referral to the Ombudsman

The resident asked us to investigate as she remained unhappy with how the landlord handled her reports of cannabis use in the block. She was unclear about her desired outcome.

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.

Complaint

Reports of cannabis use

Finding

No maladministration

What we did not investigate

  1. The resident was concerned about the potential health effects of cannabis and the stress caused by prolonged reporting to the landlord. The courts are best placed to deal with health disputes. They will have the benefit of independent medical advice to decide on the cause of any illness or injury and how long it will last. We have not investigated this further. We can decide if a landlord should pay compensation for any distress and inconvenience.
  2. The resident said she was reporting issues of cannabis for around 2 or 3 years before she made her complaint on 20 April 2023. We encourage residents to raise complaints with their landlord when problems happen, or within a reasonable time, usually 12 months. These complaints were not brough to us at the time. Based on this and the evidence available, we have focused our investigation on the period leading up to the complaint in April 2023 and the related responses. Any reference to previous events is for context only.
  3. The resident told us there was antisocial behaviour relating to noise and a physical assault in the block. We are unable to investigate complaints which the landlord has not had the opportunity to respond to. There is no evidence the resident raised complaints with the landlord about these issues. We have, therefore, not investigated this matter.

What we did investigate

  1. The resident made reports of cannabis use to the landlord in March 2022. It told her to report incidents to the police in line with its ASB policy. This was appropriate as cannabis use is a criminal matter. In December 2022, she said the problem continued, and police had not acted. It said it could only act if the police did, in line with its policy. Its policy was not specific about this type of report or how it would manage reports of cannabis. We note that in December 2023 it updated its policy to set out how it would handle similar cases.
  2. The landlords stage 1 complaint response confirmed it had followed its policy. However, best practice suggests that early intervention such as warning letters, block visits, and liaising with the police would have been reasonable. It could also have provided an action plan and considered a risk assessment due to her vulnerabilities.
  3. Records show that the landlord undertook 2 visits in May 2023 as promised in its stage 1 response. It found no signs of cannabis use.
  4. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response to the resident provided clear instructions for reporting future incidents. This included the use of diary sheets. It also liaised with the police but there was no evidence provided to suggest its findings. This was appropriate and in line with its policy.
  5. Following the landlord’s stage 2 complaint response, it completed 8 visits over a period of 4 weeks. It again found no evidence of cannabis use. At the time the resident confirmed the situation had improved and that she was due to move to an alternative property.
  6. The landlord offered £100 for its delay in issuing the reminder letter to the block. Whilst we appreciate the situation would have been distressing for the resident, it acted in line with its policy at the time. It made appropriate attempts to address the issue and has demonstrated learning by making changes to its policy.

Complaint

The complaint

Finding

Reasonable redress
  1. The Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) 1 April 2022 required landlords to acknowledge a compliant within 5 working days and respond to stage 1 and 2 complaints within 10 and 20 working days respectively. It may extend complaints by 10 working days at each stage. The landlord’s policy did not comply with the Code at the time.
  2. The landlord issued its stage 1 response to the resident in 6 working days, in line with the Code and its policy.
  3. The resident escalated the complaint on 15 May 2023, but the landlord delayed holding its stage 2 review meeting, as per its policy, until 5 September 2023.
  4. The landlord sent its stage 2 response 69 working days late based on the Code and its policy. We have seen no evidence to suggest it discussed an extension with the resident.
  5. That said, the landlord acknowledged the delay, apologised and offered £100 compensation. This was in line with the range of awards set out in our remedies guidance.

Learning

  1. It is positive that the landlord has updated its complaints policy to align with the code.
  2. It is positive that that landlord has updated its ASB policy to provide specific details of how they will deal with reports that are also a crime.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

  1. The landlord’s overall record keeping was evidenced to be satisfactory in this case.

Communication

  1. Landlords must maintain clear communication with residents, so they are aware of actions taken and progression of queries and complaints.