We are updating our systems this weekend. You will be unable to submit an online complaint form from Friday 3 April until Monday 6 April.

Normal services will resume on Tuesday 7 April.

Thank you for your patience.

The Riverside Group Limited (202320401)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202320401

The Riverside Group Limited

22 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. This complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. Allegations of antisocial behaviour (ASB) made about the resident’s behaviour.
    2. The resident’s reports of ASB including issues with smoking and the use of scooters around the scheme.

Background

  1. The resident holds an assured tenancy. The property is a 1-bedroom flat in a retirement community.
  2. The resident has told the Ombudsman he is partially sighted, disabled and suffers from depression.
  3. The resident raised a complaint with the landlord which it responded to at stage 1 of its complaints process on 26 August 2022. This was regarding several issues the resident had including: the heat of the communal corridors, the safety on hand railings in the building, neighbours not using the communal smoking area, neighbours’ usage of mobility scooters within the scheme and the level of service charges. The landlord did not uphold the resident’s complaint but agreed to speak with the relevant neighbours to remind them about scooter usage and the appropriate locations to smoke.
  4. The resident requested an escalation of his complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints process, which the landlord provided its response to on 28 December 2022. It again did not uphold his complaint or provide him with any compensation. It did however confirm it had sent a letter to all residents on 26 September 2022 reminding them about where they were able to smoke and said staff in the property would be monitoring the compliance.
  5. The resident had incidents with neighbours on 26 April 2023 and 29 August 2023. Following these the landlord sent the resident a ‘breach of tenancy’ warning letter on 26 September 2023 saying his behaviour had caused alarm and distress and reminding him of the terms of his tenancy agreement. The resident wrote to the landlord to raise a new complaint on 31 October 2023. He was unhappy with the landlord’s handling of the allegations against him, as well as its failure to deal with his reports of ASB against neighbours’ improper usage of scooters and smoking facilities. He felt the landlord had failed to deal with these issues and was failing in its duty of care.
  6. The landlord decided to treat this as a stage 2 complaint as it followed on from his 2022 complaint. It provided its complaint response on 9 January 2024. It said it had spoken with neighbours and asked them to refrain from smoking outside the entrance and also agreed to install new no-smoking signage at the entrance and fire exit. It said it had also reminded his neighbours about the speed of their mobility scooters inside the building. It said it had also investigated the resident’s concerns about false allegations of his ASB but believed it had dealt with these appropriately. It said if the resident felt neighbours were making slanderous allegations it recommended he seek legal advice about the issue.
  7. The resident confirmed to the Ombudsman on 29 April 2024 that he wished for us to consider his complaint. He said he felt the landlord had not fairly investigated the allegations of ASB against him. He also said the landlord had failed to properly act against his own reports of ASB against his neighbours smoking in inappropriate locations and driving too fast on scooters. 

Assessment and findings

The scope of this investigation

  1. The resident has said the landlord’s actions have had a negative effect on his health. It is beyond the remit of the Ombudsman to decide on whether there was a direct link between the landlord’s actions and the resident’s ill-health. The resident may wish to seek independent advice on making a personal injury claim if he considers that his health has been affected by any action or failure by the landlord. While the Ombudsman cannot consider the effect on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced as a result of any service failure by the landlord.
  2. When considering complaints relating to ASB, it is not the role of the Ombudsman to reach a decision on what has occurred. Instead, the Ombudsman’s role is to consider whether the landlord has taken reasonable and appropriate steps to respond to reports about these incidents. This report will focus on whether the landlord acted in line with its policies and procedures, and if it took proportionate action and followed good practice.
  3. In a conversation with the Ombudsman the resident highlighted issues with specific members of the landlord’s staff in handling of both reports made against him and his own reports of ASB. When investigating a complaint about a landlord, this Service will consider the response of the landlord as a whole and will comment on the actions of individuals only in so far as they are acting on behalf of the landlord. We cannot order the landlord to take disciplinary action against individual staff members, or order remedies from individual staff such as personal apologies.
  4. The resident has raised concerns to the Ombudsman about certain issues including the landlord’s use of air fresheners in the property and handling of a refund in relation to service charges amongst others. As these elements did not form part of the resident’s complaint, which he concluded following the landlord stage 2 complaint response on 9 January 2024, the Ombudsman is not able to consider these as a part of this investigation. The Ombudsman can only comment on matters which the landlord has first had the opportunity to put right through its complaints process.

Policies and Procedures

  1. The landlord’s ASB policy adopts the same definition of ASB that is set out in the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act, 2014. This is:
    1. Conduct that has caused, or is likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress to any person.
    2. Conduct capable of causing nuisance or annoyance to a person in relation to that person’s occupation of residential premises, or
    3. Conduct capable of causing housing-related nuisance or annoyance to any person.
  2. The landlord’s ASB policy says that when tackling ASB, it will strive to:
    1. Have in place a robust tenancy or licence agreement clearly outlining its stance on anti-social behaviour.
    2. Take all complaints of nuisance and anti-social behaviour seriously and respond promptly in an effective and sensitive manner aiming to resolve issues.
    3. Keep complainants informed of developments as appropriate.
    4. Acknowledge that each case of anti-social behaviour is different and take a harm centred approach to dealing with the issue, tailoring the support offered to victims and witnesses appropriately.
    5. Consider and where appropriate use intervention measures such as mediation services, referral to agencies such as floating support providers and inter agency partnerships to deliver recreational or diversionary projects.
    6. Consider and where appropriate offer support to vulnerable residents and families who are responsible for anti-social behaviour to try and help modify their behaviour.

The landlord’s handling of allegations of ASB made about the resident’s behaviour.

  1. The first ASB incident the landlord dealt with regarding the resident’s behaviour occurred on 26 April 2023. On this date an altercation occurred between the resident and a neighbour. The neighbour accused the resident of being verbally offensive during this encounter. The resident reported this began as he felt his neighbour was driving too fast on their mobility scooter around the scheme.
  2. The landlord arranged a meeting with the resident to discuss the incident on 12 May 2023. At this meeting the resident asked the landlord for a copy of CCTV footage of the incident. However, as its system only stored CCTV footage for 14 days, the landlord did not have an opportunity to consider this. It did note however that the CCTV did not record sound and the camera position was such that it would not have recorded the entire incident or noted who witnessed it. The landlord’s actions in arranging a meeting to discuss this incident with the resident was fair.
  3. Following the meeting, the landlord wrote to the resident on 17 May 2023 offering him mediation with the neighbour. It said as it was one party’s word against the other it would not be taking any further action against either party. It did however remind him of his obligations under his tenancy agreement. It also asked him not to seek to enforce its policies or procedures in the future as its staff would do this. The landlord’s handling of any allegations in this instance appears to have been fair and represented an appropriate, informal resolution to attempt to manage the reported ASB in line with its policy.
  4. A further incident occurred on 29 August 2023 where the resident had an altercation with several neighbours who were smoking. Several neighbours reported to the landlord that the resident waved a walking stick in one of their faces and engaged in intimidating behaviour. The landlord wrote to the resident following this on 26 September 2023 and provided him with a breach of tenancy warning letter.
  5. The landlord said in its letter that it had performed extensive investigations into the incident, having reviewed witness reports and communicated with the police regarding this. In its tenancy warning letter, it reminded the resident of the terms of his tenancy agreement which stated that he ‘must not behave (or threaten to behave) in a violent, menacing, threatening or abusive manner’. The landlord’s letter reminded him of his tenancy obligations and stated the landlord may take further action if incidents continued.
  6. The landlord’s handling of these allegations was fair. The landlord has provided evidence that it had a phone call with the resident and wrote to both the resident and his neighbour to arrange a meeting regarding ongoing issues on 13 September 2023. The evidence is unclear if this meeting took place. Nevertheless, the landlord’s evidence demonstrates that it investigated the reports appropriately.
  7. If the landlord felt that the resident acted in a way which breached his tenancy and caused distress to others it was fair of it to put this into writing. The landlord has obligations to all the residents of its scheme and if it felt the resident had acted in a way that had negatively affected other residents the landlord was within its rights to send the resident a tenancy warning letter. The landlord’s handling of the allegations of ASB against the resident in this instance are fair.
  8. The resident also further expressed concerns to the landlord about an incident during a Tenants Meeting which took place on 14 December 2023. It said that following a discussion about smoking around the exits and entrances the landlord halted the meeting due to a ‘customer singling out and verbally addressing individuals present at the meeting’. The minutes from this meeting do not specify who this individual was.
  9. The resident reported to the landlord he felt the meeting minutes represented false allegations against him. The landlord said in its stage 2 complaint response on 9 January 2024 that the arguing in the meeting was from both sides in equal amounts. The landlord did not take any action or issue any warnings to the resident following this. Given the landlord’s lack of action, there is no evidence the landlord treated the resident unfairly following this meeting.
  10. The landlord recommended in its stage 2 complaint response that if the resident felt particular neighbours had been making allegations about his behaviour that were slanderous, he could obtain advice from Citizens Advice Bureau about the possible actions available to him. The landlord advised this as it felt the disagreements between residents were a civil matter, rather than incidents of ASB. The landlord’s actions in recommending further advice about the resident’s options and attempting to resolve this as a civil matter were fair.
  11. The allegations of ASB against the resident have clearly caused him distress. Despite the landlord’s handling of these broadly being fair, its policy does however state it will ‘consider and where appropriate offer support to vulnerable residents…who are responsible for anti-social behaviour’. In this instance the landlord has not demonstrated it has considered whether it would be appropriate to refer the resident for additional support, despite being aware of his vulnerabilities. Given his evident ongoing distress over the allegations the landlord should have considered if the resident required additional support, as per its policy. The landlord’s failure to consider this represented service failure in the landlord’s handling of allegations of ASB made about the resident’s behaviour. 
  12. For this failing the landlord should pay the resident £100 compensation. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance which recommends figures in this range where there has been ‘a minor failure by the landlord in the service it provided’ which ‘it did not appropriately acknowledge…or put right’.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB including issues with smoking and the use of scooters around the scheme.

  1. The resident reported neighbours smoking in around and the property, as well as the improper use of mobility scooters, as antisocial behaviour. As these both caused nuisance and annoyance to the resident in relation to his occupation of the scheme it would have been appropriate for the landlord to consider this through its ASB procedures.
  2. The landlord did investigate the resident’s reports and confirmed there was little it could do to stop neighbours smoking inside their own properties since it permitted this in tenancy agreements. The resident was also concerned that neighbours were leaving their front doors open which was causing the smell of smoke to enter the corridor.
  3. The landlord noted the resident’s concerns and informed staff members at the scheme to ask residents to close any doors which they had left open whilst smoking and to continue to monitor this. Given what it allows in its tenancy agreements the Ombudsman agrees the landlord’s ability to stop residents from smoking in their properties is limited. It clearly set this out to this resident and managed his expectations of what available actions it could take. Its handling of the resident’s concerns in this instance was fair.
  4. The resident also expressed concerns about neighbours smoking near the entrance to the building and near the fire exit. The landlord has taken several steps to mitigate this including by sending reminder letters to residents on 26 September 2022 and reminding neighbours not to smoke near entrances in tenant’s meetings on 2 November 2023 and 14 December 2023. It also installed new signage by the relevant smoking spots and purchased an outdoor smoking bench. These were proportionate and reasonable actions to attempt to mitigate neighbours from smoking in areas the landlord has informed them they should not be and the subsequent ASB from doing so.
  5. The landlord has however stated there are again limitations to what it can do to stop smoking due to the proximity of the entrance of the property being in close proximity to the pavement which is a public highway. The landlord is unable to enforce non-smoking on a path which does not form part of its property. The landlord also stated it permits smoking at the back of the property in outside areas. The landlord’s explanation on this in its stage 2 complaint response was fair and reasonable given the limitations on its action on a public highway.
  6. The resident also reported ASB from neighbours using mobility scooters in the scheme. He felt neighbours misused these and were riding these at inappropriate speeds. The resident mentioned this when making his original complaint in 2022, as well as following an incident with a neighbour in April 2023. On both occasions the landlord emphasised that it allowed tenants to use scooters in the scheme as they allow residents to more easily move around.
  7. The landlord did however agree on both occasions to speak with the relevant neighbours in order to remind them about their speeds. Given the landlord’s allowance of mobility scooters throughout the scheme this appears to have been a reasonable step from the landlord.
  8. The Ombudsman is sorry to hear of the impact the ASB has had on the resident. We acknowledge this has been a difficult time for him and the incidents of reported ASB caused him distress and upset. However, landlords can only take formal action against tenants for ASB, such as acceptable behaviour orders, court injunctions or eviction if there is sufficient evidence to show this is appropriate. The landlord had to make reasonable efforts to resolve the issue informally before it could take further action. In this case, the Ombudsman has not seen sufficient evidence to suggest the landlord should have escalated its actions against the neighbours beyond the informal steps it already took.
  9. The landlord should, however, have done more to offer the resident support as per the terms in its ASB policy. Given the Ombudsman found service failure in the landlord’s actions for not offering support under the previous complaint definition the Ombudsman has not made therefore made a failing of service failure in relation to this, however. The landlord should consider at what stage it is appropriate to offer residents additional support when the available actions it can take to respond to ASB are limited.
  10. Overall, the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB was broadly in line with the Ombudsman’s expectations and its ASB policy. The landlord reacted reasonably to each of the ASB reports by investigating these and attempting to implement informal resolutions such as reminding residents about their tenancy terms and installing signage and a new smoking bench to deter smoking. The landlord was also open with the resident about the limitations in the actions in could take to curb certain problems. 
  11. The Ombudsman therefore finds no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB including smoking in and around the property and improper use of mobility scooters.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of allegations of ASB made about the resident’s behaviour.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB including issues with smoking and the use of scooters around the scheme.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

  1. It is ordered that, within 4 weeks of the date of this letter the landlord:
    1. Pay the resident £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused in its handling of allegations of ASB made about his behaviour.
    2. Apologise to the resident in writing.
    3. Write to the resident to provide advice on the possible support mechanisms it has in place to support him and to signpost him on how to contact the available support services.
    4. Provide evidence that it has done so.

 

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should review the support options it is providing with residents who are reporting ASB to it. It should particularly consider this in circumstances where it may have limited power to resolve ongoing issues.