Wakefield And District Housing Limited (202207642)

Back to Top

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202207642

Wakefield And District Housing Limited

28 March 2023

 

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 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. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB) from a neighbour from August 2021 to May 2022.

Background

  1. The resident is a tenant of a landlord, who had previously been residing in a one-bedroom flat in a block during the course of the complaint, until he moved out in May 2022. He has mental health vulnerabilities, of which the landlord has been made aware.
  2. The resident previously complained to this Service about the landlord, in relation to its response to his reports of ASB in the form of noise nuisance by his neighbour. We investigated its handling of his reports about this from September 2020 to July 2021, and we found that there had been reasonable redress made by it to him at that time for its failures in doing so.
  3. The resident’s subsequent ASB reports to the landlord about his neighbour from August 2021 to February 2022 showed that he regularly emailed, called, submitted diary sheets, made noise app recordings and obtained witnesses from its staff to report loud music from the neighbour to it. It therefore installed sound recording equipment at his former property and spoke to his other neighbours to seek further evidence of this in August to September 2021, as well as offering him support for his vulnerabilities and help with seeking to move properties. The landlord also received supporting evidence of the effect of the noise on the resident from his family and medical professionals at this time.
  4. The landlord’s analysis of the noise recordings of the resident’s neighbour found that, although noise from them playing music could be heard every few days, this alone was not considered to be loud or persistent enough for the local authority to take action against this as a statutory nuisance. Therefore, the landlord informed the resident in October 2021 that it required further witness evidence of more persistent noise from the neighbour, which was above the level that it had previously agreed with them, for it to take tenancy action against the neighbour for this. Its assessment of the noise from its subsequent visits and his noise app recordings in November to December 2021 was that this was not at a high enough volume or regularity for it to take such tenancy action, but it did speak to and write to warn the neighbour about this.
  5. The resident continued to make the above ASB reports to the landlord about neighbour’s loud music in January 2022, when he also began reporting this to the police who liaised with it about this, but it closed the latest ASB case that it had opened for him for the noise at that time. This was because its latest visits to his former property had not witnessed the noise, and the recordings of this did not show that the noise was persistent or excessive. The landlord also explained to the resident that the makeup of the block of flats meant that he would hear some noise from other flats, and so he could not have complete silence at all times.
  6. However, the resident subsequently made further ASB reports with supporting evidence from his family and medical professionals to the landlord in March 2022. This was of further loud music being played by the neighbour, and these outlined the effect of this on him, for which it was not taking action against his neighbour. The landlord therefore investigated the resident’s reports further, obtained additional evidence of the ASB and the effect of this on him from his family and medical professionals, and referred his case to its community safety team in March 2022. The resident believed that, after this, the landlord began to deal with his ASB case “properly”.
  7. The resident then tried to raise another stage one complaint with the landlord in May 2022 about its handling of his reports of ASB from the neighbour, but he was advised by it in May 2022 that it would be unable to consider his complaint again as this had already been investigated by it. It explained that it had previously issued him with a final stage response to that complaint in July 2021, which had then been investigated and determined by this Service above, and it referred him back to us. The residenttherefore made a further stage one complaint to the landlord in August 2022, on our advice, in which he asked it why it had not responded to his previous ASB reports in the same way that it had after the referral to its community safety team.
  8. When the landlord again declined to investigate the resident’s latest complaint in September 2022, as it repeated that it and this Service had already done so and referred him back to us again, he brought another complaint to us. The outcome that he wanted was to know why it had changed the way that it had acted, instead of taking the “resolution and urgency” of the community safety team’s approach sooner. The resident also sought for the landlord to ensure that this approach was taken for him and for others in similar situations in the future.
  9. The landlord then advised this Service that any difference between how the resident’s ASB reports were handled before and after its referral of his case to its community safety team was due to his most recent ASB reports in March 2022 reaching a score of 29 on its risk assessment matrix. This indicated a more serious occurrence of ASB, as a score of 25 or above indicated that the risk to victim was high, and so his case was allocated to the community safety team in line with its ASB procedure, with his previous reports also being handled in accordance with the procedure.
  10. The landlord’s risk assessment for the resident, which it provided to this Service, indicated that the risk to him was now assessed as high due to his mental health vulnerabilities and the effect of the ASB on these, which it determined after obtaining further evidence of this from his family and medical professionals. It added that it was willing to investigate his complaint about this under its complaints procedure, if we found that this was not the same as his previous complaint. The landlord also provided this Service with evidence of the resident’s ASB reports to it about the neighbour from August 2021 to May 2022, and of its responses to these.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has complained that the landlord did not deal with his previous ASB reports in the way that its community safety team did from March 2022 onwards. However, in accordance with the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, this Service may not consider complaints that seek to raise again matters that we have already decided upon. Therefore, the scope of this investigation to limited to assessing the landlord’s handling of the resident’s ASB reports from after the period covered by our investigation of his previous complaint until he moved out of his former property, i.e. from August 2021 to May 2022. Also, while it has offered to investigate his complaint about this period at our request, this exhausted its complaints procedure in September 2022, and it would not be fair to require him to do so again.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB from a neighbour from August 2021 to May 2022

  1. The landlord’s ASB procedure confirms that cases are assessed as being high risk with an score of 25 or above, and that such cases will be dealt with by its community safety team. The procedure requires it to investigate reports of ASB in the form of noise nuisance by seeking evidence of this, including by obtaining diary sheets, interviewing the parties, obtaining noise recordings from residents’ noise apps and its own equipment, and making referrals to and liaising with other agencies.
  2. The landlord responded to the resident’s emails, calls, diary sheets and noise app recordings reporting ASB to it, in the form of loud music from his neighbour, from August 2021 to January 2022 by seeking further evidence of this in accordance with its ASB procedure. It did so with investigations including considering his evidence, sending its staff to his former property to witness this, installing sound recording equipment at the property, and speaking to his other neighbours. The landlord also liaised with others including the resident’s family and medical professionals and the police, and it offered him support with his vulnerabilities and to move properties, which was appropriate.
  3. The landlord’s assessment of this evidence of ASB from the resident’s neighbour did not, however, find such persistent or loud noise nuisance that either the local authority or the landlord could take further action for this against statutory noise nuisance or the neighbour’s tenancy, respectively. Additionally, this did not therefore find the resident to be at high risk from this, requiring a referral to its community safety team, until his subsequent ASB reports to it March 2022 were accompanied by further supporting evidence of the effect on his mental health vulnerabilities from his family and medical professionals. This meant that the ASB procedure did not require the landlord to make the referral to the community safety team until its March 2022 investigations found that this put him at high risk.
  4. The landlord subsequently investigated the resident’s further supporting evidence by liaising with his family and medical professionals again. This found that he had a score of 29 on its risk assessment matrix from the effect of the ASB on his mental health vulnerabilities, for which it made the referral to its community safety team that he was subsequently satisfied with in March 2022. This was an appropriate response by the landlord because the score obliged it to make the referral at that time in accordance with its ASB procedure, whereas the lack of evidence of a high risk to him prior to this meant that it was not previously required to do so. The landlord therefore dealt with the resident’s reports of ASB from August 2021 to May 2022 reasonably and in line with the procedure.
  5. It is nevertheless of concern that the landlord’s processes and staff were unable to identify that the resident’s latest stage one complaint to it included this period, instead of only referring to its handling of his earlier ASB reports, which was previously investigated by it and this Service. While there is no evidence that its inability to do so caused any detriment to him, as it twice promptly referred him to us and offered to investigate the latest complaint at our request that related to the now historic ASB at his former property, we have made recommendations to it below. This is to try and prevent this situation from occurring again in the future.
  6. The landlord has been recommended to review its complaint handling processes to seek to ensure that these fully capture all of the aspects of its residents’ complaints, so that all of these are addressed in its complaint responses, and it is able to distinguish between new issues and previous complaints. It has also been recommended to review its complaint handling staff’s training needs in relation to identifying and responding to new issues raised by residents who have previously complained to it about similar matters.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour from a neighbour from August 2021 to May 2022.

Recommendations

  1. It is recommended that the landlord:
    1. Review its complaint handling processes to seek to ensure that these fully capture all of the aspects of its residents’ complaints, so that all of these are addressed in its complaint responses, and it is able to distinguish between new issues and previous complaints.
    2. Review its complaint handling staff’s training needs in relation to identifying and responding to new issues raised by residents who have previously complained to it about similar matters.