Southern Housing Group Limited (202307715)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202307715

Southern Housing Group Limited

26 January 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of Antisocial Behaviour (ASB).
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident was an assured tenant at the property between November 2022 and October 2023, where he lived with his wife. The property is a first floor 2-bedroom flat owned and managed by the landlord, a housing association.
On 13 December 2022, the resident reported there had been shouting and noises of furniture being moved from the flat directly above his property for approximately 6 days, which was affecting his sleep. He asked the landlord to contact him to discuss the issue.
The landlord sent the resident an email on 19 December 2022, in which it asked:
1. If there had been any further incidents since his report on 13 December 2022, including specific dates and times.
2. If he had contacted any other agencies, such as Environmental Health.
3. If he gave permission for it to contact his neighbour about his report.
The resident emailed the landlord on 19 December 2022 asking to drop his report, so the landlord took no further action.
The resident made a second report on 6 January 2023, saying his neighbour had been making noise every night and using drugs. The resident said he dropped his previous report because his neighbour had apologised, but the problem had started again.
The landlord emailed the resident on 6 January 2023 asking him the same questions it had posed in its email dated 19 December 2022. We have not seen any evidence of a response from the resident. The landlord also contacted the police to ask if they had investigated any reports of drug use. The police responded on 9 January 2023, saying they had attended following reports of drug use but had found no evidence of this.
The police contacted the landlord on 21 January 2023 saying they had attended the neighbour’s property following further reports of drug use. The landlord spoke to police on 27 January 2023 and sent a warning letter to the neighbour the same date.
Between 10 February 2023 and 22 February 2023, the resident raised 5 reports to the landlord. The resident said he had anxiety and it was affecting his sleep and mental health. The reported issues included:
1. The sounds of TV, voices and furniture being moved frequently keeping him awake during the night.
2. Regular visitors at the neighbour’s house every night, including the neighbour’s friend who appeared to be living there with the neighbour despite being housed separately by the landlord.
3. The neighbour banging on the floor at them during daytime hours when they were completing everyday tasks such as vacuuming.
4. A specific incident on 9 February 2023 when the neighbour and his friend had a loud fight, which resulted in the police arriving, arresting them both, and confiscating drug paraphernalia.
5. The neighbour verbally abusing him and accusing him of calling the police.
The landlord told the resident on 22 February 2023 it would send the neighbour another warning letter. It also said it would contact the police and other neighbours to get more evidence. The landlord sent the neighbour a second warning letter on 27 February 2023.
The resident reported on 1 March 2023 that the neighbour had been causing more noise nuisance and that they had caused water damage on the resident’s ceiling by allowing the bath to overflow. The landlord emailed the resident on 3 March 2023, providing a contact number for its repairs team and saying it would add the incident to its ASB log.
The resident emailed the landlord on 15 March 2023 with a diary of incidents that had occurred between 17 February 2023 and 2 March 2023. These included:
1. Stomping, banging and the sound of furniture being moved.
2. The smell of cigarettes and cigarette smoke spreading from the neighbour’s property.
3. Shouting and swearing.
4. The sounds of DIY work being completed.
The landlord contacted the police on 16 March 2023 and asked if they had been investigating any reports into the neighbour. The police said they had attended recently and arrested the neighbour for suspected possession of a replica firearm, but this had been a mistake by the officer. The police said they had spoken to the neighbour about the noise complaint, who had told them it may be caused by a lack of carpets in the property and the fact the neighbour used a walking aid due to his disability. The landlord told the police it was not considering installing carpets at that time because of an infestation of bedbugs, for which it was in the process of arranging treatment.
The landlord spoke to the resident by telephone on 17 March 2023 and followed this up with an email summarising the discussion. The landlord confirmed:
1. The resident did not want to proceed with mediation because he had previously received verbal abuse from his neighbour.
2. It would contact the neighbour to discuss the case.
3. It would contact the police to discuss the crime reference number the resident had provided.
4. It would contact Environmental Health to discuss the reference number the resident had provided.
5. It would provide him with weekly email updates on Friday mornings.
Emails between the landlord and police between 17 March 2023 and 24 March 2023 show the police told the landlord it had visited the resident in response to noise complaints but the complaints were regarding usual household noises such as lights being turned on and the toilet being flushed, which it could not take any action on. The police also told the landlord that the crime reference number provided by the resident was for a third-party incident unrelated to the resident and his neighbour. The police said it had no active enquiries about the neighbour.
Between 19 March 2023 and 22 March 2023, the resident sent the landlord 5 further reports of ASB via email. The reports included allegations of the neighbour stamping on the floor, smoking cannabis, and having several visitors who were causing noise.
On 24 March 2023, the landlord sent the resident an email, in which it:
1. Recounted its discussion with the police and asked him for confirmation of the correct crime reference number.
2. Confirmed it had sent an information disclosure request to the police for information held on the neighbour.
3. Said it had contacted Environmental Health and was awaiting a response.
4. Confirmed it had attempted to call his neighbour unsuccessfully and would continue to attempt contact.
5. Acknowledged the further ASB reports from the resident.
6. Said it understood the resident had been recording some of the noise nuisance and asked if he could send this to it to help build up a potential legal case.
7. Said it would not email the resident regularly anymore because he had said he would prefer telephone calls.
The landlord sent the resident another email on 31 March 2023 regarding the same points. The landlord said:
1. There were no updates on most of the points as it was still awaiting responses from the resident and Environmental Health.
2. It had received the information disclosure from the police, which confirmed he and his wife were the only people to complain about the neighbour and all complaints had been closed by the police with no further action planned.
3. It had continued trying to call the neighbour and left voicemails but had received no response.
4. It would like the resident to send over any recordings he had made of the noise nuisance, as previously requested.
The landlord emailed the resident again on 11 April 2023, stating:
1. It had received no further ASB reports from the resident since its last update.
2. It had contacted the police again who had confirmed they had received no further reports and had no open cases.
3. Environmental Health had told the landlord there were no developments on its case, but they had agreed to contact the landlord if any developments arose.
4. It had received contact from the neighbour through an external agency and, while it could not disclose full details for data protection reasons, it considered it was limited on further enforcement action it could take without further supporting evidence. The landlord said the case was his word against his neighbour’s.
5. The resident should download NoiseApp to his mobile phone and use this to record and send any further noise nuisance to it.
The resident called the landlord on 15 May 2023 asking for a priority home move because of the impact the ASB was having on his mental health. The resident said he would send a medical assessment to the landlord to help with this. The resident also raised a complaint on this date about the landlord’s handling of his ASB reports.
The landlord wrote to the resident’s MP on 19 May 2023 in response to the MP’s letter dated 28 April 2023. The landlord told the MP it was limited in the further action it could take, but it agreed to:
1. Investigate further with other neighbours to see if they could corroborate the neighbour’s reports.
2. Explain to the resident how he can use NoiseApp to record noise nuisance.
3. Explore mediation between the resident and his neighbour.
The landlord wrote to the resident on 23 May 2023 stating it would send a stage 1 response in line with its complaints procedure within 10 working days.
On 8 June 2023, the landlord wrote to the resident stating it needed more time to complete a thorough investigation into the complaint. The landlord said it would issue its response within a further 10 working days. The landlord’s notes from this time show it was attempting to contact other neighbours for their testimonies about the alleged ASB.
The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 21 June 2023, in which it:
1. Defined the resident’s complaint as being about the handling of the ASB reports and the worsening of the ASB incidents.
2. Acknowledged the resident’s desired resolution for the ASB handling to be reviewed and any issues acknowledged by management.
3. Outlined the history of the ASB reports and its actions.
4. Confirmed it had failed to abide by its policy in 5 areas.
5. Said the historical issue of bedbugs in the building had hindered its ability to have face to face meetings with the neighbour.
6. Apologised for its “service failure” and offered compensation of £150 to resolve the complaint.
7. Confirmed an ongoing action plan, which included information being sourced from neighbours to support the case, further action to be taken by the legal team regarding the neighbour’s “breaches of tenancy” and updates being provided to the resident as appropriate.
8. Told the resident how to escalate the complaint to stage 2 if he remained dissatisfied.
The landlord emailed the resident on 29 June 2023 attaching a priority home move form. The landlord told the resident his case would be heard by a panel and it would help if he could provide a letter from his GP and impact statements from him and his wife explaining how the living situation is impacting them.
The resident emailed the landlord asking to escalate the complaint to stage 2 on 10 July 2023. The resident said they were still suffering with no support from the landlord.
On 18 July 2023, the landlord confirmed it had sent the completed priority move form to the decision panel. This included the GP letter and impact statements the resident had provided.
In a separate email on 18 July 2023, the landlord told the resident it had contacted his neighbours about the ASB as agreed in the action plan. The landlord said it was “at the stage where serious breaches by your neighbour…have been proven by diary sheets, medical evidence…and neighbour updates”. The landlord said it would collate the evidence and then move forward legally. The landlord told the resident it would update him in due course.
The landlord sent its stage 2 response on 20 July 2023, in which it:
1. Said it had been updating the resident with the actions it had been taking.
2. Said it would update him on the panel’s decision for a priority move when it heard about this.
3. Confirmed it had reviewed its stage 1 response and felt an increased offer of £300 compensation was appropriate.
4. Told the resident to let it know if he wanted to accept this in resolution to his complaint.
5. Provided details for this Service if the resident wanted to reject its offer and take the complaint further.
The resident duly made his complaint to this Service on 26 July 2023. Through bringing the matter to this Service, the resident said he was seeking an increased compensation offer, as well as an expedited priority home move and for the landlord to take action against the alleged perpetrator.
The resident subsequently confirmed to this Service that he moved to another address owned by the landlord through the mutual exchange process on 23 October 2023.

Assessment and findings

Reports of ASB

Section 2.3 of the landlord’s ASB procedure (“assessing vulnerability”) says the landlord has a “continuing responsibility to identify those who are vulnerable and/or at risk”, and states the landlord must complete a risk assessment at the outset of an ASB report and review this after 3 months.
Section 2.5 of the ASB procedure (“prioritising our response”) says that the landlord should categorise ASB reports into high, medium or low risk; and contact the complainant within 1 working day for high risk reports or 2 working days for medium or low risk reports.
There is no evidence the landlord completed a risk assessment at any time during the course of this matter despite the resident’s frequent reports of ASB. A risk assessment would have been particularly important in this case given the alleged verbal abuse and drug usage the resident had reported.
It took the landlord 6 days to respond to the resident’s first report of ASB on 13 December 2022, which was outside its required timescales for ASB reports of all levels of risk.
Section 2.6 of the ASB procedure (“initial response”) says that, once it has made an initial assessment, the landlord should:
1. Explain the next steps and associated timescales.
2. Offer to send an ASB leaflet to the complainant.
3. Offer to send the complainant diary sheets to help record new incidents.
4. Ask the complainant if they have any support needs.
The evidence suggests the landlord did not complete any of these steps in response to the resident’s first two reports on 13 December 2022 and 6 January 2023. The resident subsequently sent the landlord diarised events, beginning on 17 February 2023. However, from the evidence seen, it appears the landlord never sent the resident any literature on ASB or asked him if he had any additional support needs, which it should have done immediately upon receiving the first ASB report under its policy.
The landlord told the resident on 17 March 2023 it would contact his neighbour to discuss the ASB reports. The landlord tried to call the neighbour multiple times without success but did not attempt to visit the neighbour in person. The landlord’s correspondence with the police on 16 March 2023 suggests it did not visit the property because of an infestation of bedbugs. While it is understandable the landlord would not want to visit until it had dealt with the bedbug infestation, the allegations of ASB were ongoing for many months after this without the landlord attending the property to speak to the alleged perpetrator. A lack of action on the landlord’s part in relation to the bedbug infestation cannot be justification for a lack of action in relation to the ASB reports.
Section 4.4 of the ASB procedure (“evidence gathering tools”) says the landlord can employ different types of evidence gathering processes or tools to further investigate some cases, including:
1. Noise monitoring equipment.
2. CCTV.
3. Diary sheets.
4. Visiting the location.
5. Professional witnesses – including police reports and body cam footage.
The landlord received emails from the resident containing diarised events, but it did not take further steps to gather evidence itself, which would have involved surveillance of the neighbour’s property through CCTV and in-person visits. The landlord was over reliant on the resident and the police to provide evidence, and it should have taken further steps to gain additional evidence in line with section 4.4 of the ASB procedure.
The landlord only told the resident about the NoiseApp tool on 11 April 2023, which was almost 4 months after the resident had first raised concerns. The landlord should have told the resident about NoiseApp when it first began investigating the reports, in addition to considering what other noise monitoring equipment it could install.
In relation to professional witnesses, the landlord did liaise with the police and Environmental Health to help gain evidence to build a case against the neighbour. However, given the volume of noise nuisance complaints the resident had raised, it would have been useful for the landlord to use professional witnessing services. These are independent Security Industry Authority licensed operatives who can attend an address in order to listen for ASB of any kind, including noise nuisance. The operatives can then produce a written report setting out their findings, which may then be used in court proceedings if required. It is not clear from the landlord’s ASB procedure if it ever utilises such a service, but the Ombudsman considers it would have been very useful in this case given the resident was raising noise nuisance concerns on an almost daily basis for much of the period.
The Ombudsman released a spotlight report on noise complaints on 24 October 2022 (“time to be heard”), in which he highlighted that “the installation of hardwood or laminate flooring was problematic, particularly in cases where the flooring installation occurred in the flat above”.
The police told the landlord on 16 March 2023 that the neighbour had told them the noise complaints may be caused by a lack of carpets in the property combined with his use of a walking aid. It is understood that a frequent visitor to the neighbour’s address also used a wheelchair, which would have compounded the noise issue. The landlord told the police it would not consider installing carpets in the neighbour’s address because of the bedbug infestation, and it never revisited this option in the months that followed. The Ombudsman considers this a significant failing from the landlord. Had it offered to install carpets for the neighbour, this could have significantly reduced the noise heard in the resident’s flat below.
The landlord told the resident in its email of 24 March 2023 that it would start calling him rather than sending email updates because the resident had requested this. Despite this, the evidence shows the landlord continued to send emails to the resident rather than making calls as requested.
The resident asked the landlord for a priority home move on 15 May 2023 because of the impact the reported ASB was having on him and his wife. The resident also provided a letter from his GP which confirmed the housing situation had a significant impact on his mental health. Despite this, the landlord only sent the resident an application form for a priority home move over 6 weeks later on 29 June 2023.
The landlord took action in this case by liaising with the police and environmental health; sending the neighbour 2 warning letters; agreeing an action plan; and, at times, providing the resident with regular updates. However, it failed to follow its ASB policy in full, which includes a structured, methodical and comprehensive process for dealing with ASB which would have considered, from the outset, the risks to the resident; his support needs; what steps to take to swiftly resolve the matter; what evidence to gather if it could not be resolved; and a structured approach to working with other agencies and the neighbour. It is likely that these failures prolonged the experience of the resident and therefore the distress and inconvenience he experienced, and this is why the Ombudsman finds maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s ASB reports.

Complaint handling

The Housing Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) provides guidance to landlords on how they should act when handling complaints from residents. Section 4.1 of the Code says landlords should acknowledge and log a complaint at stage 1 within 5 working days of receiving the complaint.
Section 4.2 of the landlord’s complaints procedure also states it will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days. It says the landlord will contact residents by telephone, where possible, and “confirm their understanding of [the] complaint and find out what resolution [the resident is] seeking”. It further states the landlord will provide a case reference number and contact details of the complaint handler.
In this case, the landlord acknowledged the complaint on 23 May 2023, which was 6 working days after the resident raised the complaint on 15 May 2023. The landlord therefore failed to abide by the timescales required under its complaints procedure and the Code for logging and acknowledging the complaint.
Furthermore, the landlord did not attempt to contact the resident over the telephone but instead sent an email. Rather than providing a new complaint reference number, the landlord used the reference number for the resident’s existing ASB reports. It also told the resident his desired resolution (“for the ASB issues to be resolved”) was not possible within the complaints procedure, as this would need to be resolved through the ASB procedure. However, the landlord did not ask the resident what alternative resolution he would like, if any. In failing to call the resident, provide a new reference number or clarify the desired resolution, the landlord did not meet its own requirements outlined in section 4.2 of its complaints procedure.
Sections 5.1 of the Code and 4.3 of the landlord’s complaint procedure state the landlord must provide a stage 1 response within 10 working days of acknowledging the complaint. Exceptionally, it may provide an explanation to the resident about an extension to this, containing a clear timeframe. This should not exceed a further 10 working days without good reason.
The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 21 June 2023, which was 20 working days after its acknowledgement of the complaint on 23 May 2023. While the landlord did tell the resident on 8 June 2023 that it needed an extension before providing its response, the landlord had already missed the initial deadline of 10 working days by the time it sought an extension. This is another failure under the Code.
Section 5.5 of the Code says that the landlord must send its complaint response “when the answer to the complaint is known, not when the outstanding actions required to address the issue are completed”.
Based on the landlord’s internal notes, the reason for the delayed response was the landlord’s attempt to contact other neighbours about the ASB allegations. The landlord went on to include this as part of its action plan in its stage 1 response. There was no reason for the landlord to delay its issuing of the stage 1 response, as it could have included this action plan and continued trying to contact the neighbours after issuing the stage 1 response on time, rather than attempting to do this before issuing the response. This was a failure on the landlord’s part under section 5.5 of the Code.
Despite the delays, the landlord’s stage 1 response was thorough and provided a history of the resident’s reports and ASB case reference numbers. The landlord included appropriate remedies including compensation and an action plan to resolve the ASB case, with the promise of regular updates to the resident.
While it included an action plan in its stage 1 response, there is no evidence the landlord completed the actions within the deadlines provided. There is also no evidence it kept the resident updated. Section 5.5 of the Code states landlords must track and complete outstanding actions expeditiously “with regular updates provided to the resident”. Had it done this in line with the stage 1 action plan, it could have avoided the resident feeling the need to request a stage 2 escalation on 10 July 2023, when he described feeling unsupported by the landlord.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there has been maladministration in respect of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
1. Reports of ASB.
2. Complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

It is hereby ordered that, within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord provides the resident with a payment of £800 for the distress and inconvenience caused by its failings in relation to the ASB reports.
It is ordered that the landlord provides the resident with a payment of £150 for the complaint handling failures identified.
It is ordered that the landlord provides the resident with an apology written by a senior member of staff.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord considers adapting professional witnessing services, as described in paragraph 43 of this report, into section 4.4 of its ASB procedure (“evidence gathering tools”).