Your Housing Limited (202303001)

A blue and grey text

Description automatically generated

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202303001

Your Housing Limited

30 April 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:
1. Response to the resident’s reports of anti-social behaviour (ASB) by her neighbours.
2. Handling of the associated complaint.

Background and summary of events

Background

The resident holds an assured tenancy with the landlord, a housing association, which started on in March 2011. The property is described as a 3-bedroom house. The landlord advised that the resident’s son is registered as disabled.

Policies and procedural information

The Crime and Policing Act 2014 defines ASB as conduct that has caused, or is likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress to any person, conduct capable of causing nuisance or annoyance to a person in relation to that person’s occupation of residential premises, or conduct capable of causing housing-related nuisance or annoyance to any person.
The landlord’s ASB policy defines ASB as conduct that causes or is likely to cause a nuisance or annoyance to anyone directly or indirectly, as to interfere with the quiet enjoyment of their home or affects its housing management functions or involves using or threatening to use its homes and neighbourhoods for an unlawful purpose.
In cases where ASB has been reported, the landlord will:
1. Contact the victim within 2 working days and carry out a risk assessment matrix, an action plan and send a copy to them.
2. Liaise with the police, other agencies or other witnesses who could provide evidence.
3. Assess the victims for signs of vulnerability to establish whether they require extra support.
4. Offer an incident diary to the victim providing them a template to record vital evidence.
5. Describe what steps will be taken to resolve the problem and what can practically be achieved.
The landlord has a 2-stage complaints handling process. It aims to acknowledge complaints within 5 working days of receipt and respond to:
1. Stage 1 complaints within 10 working days.
2. Stage 2 complaints within 20 working days.

Summary of events

The Ombudsman notes from the evidence provided by the landlord, that the resident consistently reported ASB between February 2022 and January 2023. These include:
1. Reports of verbally abusive and offensive language towards the resident and her family.
2. Deliberate obstruction of the resident’s vehicle by the neighbours.
3. Harassment and aggravating behaviour by the neighbours and their children.
4. Drug related activity by the neighbours.
5. Break in attempts into the resident’s car by the neighbour.
The evidence also indicates that the resident provided closed circuit television (CCTV) recordings of some of the incidents reported and she continued to do so until December 2022.
On 10 July 2022 the resident reported further concerns about the neighbour’s behaviour and asked the landlord to rehouse her.
The resident reported on 20 July 2022 that the neighbours’ children attempted to open her car doors.
In an internal email dated 20 September 2022, the landlord discussed making enquiries with the police regarding a car incident.
The resident’s MP wrote to the landlord on 22 September 2022 regarding the resident’s concerns about the neighbours.
The landlord responded to the MP on 3 October 2022 and advised that:
1. It was working closely with all parties involved in the complaint to resolve the issue.
2. One of the neighbours involved was being considered for a housing move.
3. A further visit was being made to the neighbouring properties to reiterate the terms of their respective tenancy agreements and the consequences of such behaviour if they failed to adhere to the advice.
4. The resident had been advised of these actions and was happy to continue dialogue with the relevant team.
The resident submitted a formal complaint to the landlord on 11 November 2022. She said:
1. The landlord was in breach of its safeguarding policy for failing to investigate and take any action for the 10 months she experienced harassment over a parking dispute with the neighbours.
2. Her quality of life and her mental health had been affected, as her pleas for help had been ignored and the perpetrators had been allowed to get away with their behaviour.
3. Her request for alternative accommodation was being hindered by one of its members of staff as they told police not to support the move.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint and advised that a response would be issued by 29 November 2022.
The landlord responded to the resident’s stage 1 complaint on 29 November 2022. It said:
1. Further to their telephone discussion on 28 November 2022, the issue was being managed through its ASB procedure, so a service failure had not been identified.
2. The case would remain open and it would continue to investigate any further complaints against the neighbour.
The resident requested the escalation of the complaint to stage 2 on 6 December 2022. She said it was not appropriate that one of the members of staff whom she had complained about had investigated the complaint. She further said:
1. The landlord should explain why it had not taken action against the neighbours’ for the targeted harassment against her family, which had been ongoing since February 2022, especially the verbal abuse towards her disabled adult son by their children.
2. The landlord failed to accept CCTV recordings provided as evidence of the verbal abuse.
3. The landlord should explain why it decided that nothing could be done when she had previously been advised that the neighbours would be moved by December 2022.
4. The landlord should acknowledge that it failed to protect her family from the neighbours and provide a detailed plan of action to resolve the issue or rehouse her.
5. An apology for the comment made by its employee stating “well, you do live in social housing.” This was not an appropriate comment as it implied that she should tolerate such behaviour because she was a social housing tenant.
The landlord acknowledged the resident’s stage 2 complaint on 14 December 2022. It advised her that it would respond by 12 January 2023.
The landlord and the resident communicated between 16 December and 22 December 2022, regarding a suitable time to discuss the case and her stage 2 complaint.
The landlord sent an email to the resident on 22 December 2022. It said it was sorry they could not have their telephone meeting as she was unwell. It advised that it would try to contact her again on 9 January 2023 at 10am.
The following events occurred on 10 January 2023:
1. The landlord advised the resident that it would leave her complaint open, review the ASB with its legal team, resume weekly contact with her and progress mediation with both parties.
2. The resident advised the landlord that she agreed to mediation on the condition that she would not have to be in the same room with the neighbours. She said it was too late for mediation to make any difference and she only agreed as she was made to feel she had no choice.
3. The landlord’s complaints team noted to a member of staff in an internal email that the complaint should not be left open, but progress could be monitored and updates provided to the resident.
The resident sent an email to the landlord on 11 January 2023. She said:
1. The neighbour had made threats to harm her and continued their disruptive behaviour within the neighbourhood.
2. Use of drugs was constant, and she could smell it in her home.
3. The neighbours and their visitors continued to park inconsiderately.
4. The landlord failed to take any actions regarding the inappropriate behaviour of the neighbour’s child.
5. No actions had been taken regarding mediation since she agreed to it in February 2022.
6. She had sent almost 300 videos as evidence of the harassment against her family, but the landlord had failed to take any action.
7. She was told that the neighbours had a history of anti-social behaviour at their previous address, but the landlord failed to acknowledge their behaviour was a concern.
8. The neighbours’ continued behaviour had affected her mental health and caused disruption to her disabled son’s day to day living.
9. Her family had been denied the freedom of entering and exiting their home freely for 11 months. She had to wear a body cam if the neighbours were outside before leaving the house.
The landlord contacted the resident on 12 January 2023 and said:
1. She should continue to send weekly incident diaries of any issues with the neighbour, and it would review them within 5 days of receipt.
2. It further advised that the last diary record was received on 20 December 2022, and asked her to confirm if she had sent any during the Christmas break.
3. It would approach the neighbour regarding mediation.
On 12 January 2023 the resident said:
1. She had not submitted any diaries because there had been no incidents aside from cannabis use. However, she had been advised that this was a police matter, so she had not logged it.
2. Progressing mediation almost a year after she first agreed to it was pointless. She had agreed to it because she was made to feel this was her only option and refusing it would suggest she was not being cooperative.
3. The verbal abuse of her disabled son had caused him so much distress.
4. She expected the landlord to stop this behaviour by her neighbours and their visitors or rehouse them. The situation had got worse and she had lost faith in the landlord or the mediation process offered.
The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 12 January 2023. It said it had completed a review of the case prior to the phone call discussion with her and email communication on 10 and 11 January 2023. It said:
1. It failed to manage her expectations since the start of the case by being clear on what actions it could take and the expected timescales for a resolution.
2. It did not follow its initial triage case management process, and it failed to put in place an action plan or agree weekly updates using incident dairies at the start of the investigation.
3. There had been ongoing discussions with statutory agencies as part of the investigation, but she had not been kept informed of the outcomes of some of these discussions.
4. It was sorry that she and her family had not been provided with the expected level of contact and support during the investigation to date.
5. As discussed during the telephone call with her on 9 January 2023, there were some lessons to be learned from her complaint, to ensure that it followed its procedures and provided support to customers when investigating ASB.
6. It was sorry for the time and trouble she had taken in pursuing the matter and assured her that this was not the level of service it aimed to provide to its customers.
7. Learning and improvements from her feedback would be discussed with the team involved and additional training would be provided to avoid similar situations from occurring in the future.
8. Due to the failures identified it would like to offer financial compensation broken down as:
  1. £100 for the distress and inconvenience.
  2. £100 for the failures in its handling of the case.
9. It would continue to investigate the ASB and agreed the following actions:
  1. Complete a review of the case with its ASB legal specialist.
  2. Contact her weekly for updates and for any actions needed.
  3. Progress mediation between both parties in accordance with any specific terms.
  4. She should continue to record any instances of ASB on the incident diary sheets provided but it may request CCTV footage if required.
  5. It would explore her rehousing options with her and agree a date to visit her the week commencing 30 January 2023.

Summary of actions after the complaints process had been exhausted

The resident informed the landlord in an email dated 13 January 2023 that she was no longer willing to move as she now had a supportive friendship group. She said the landlord had actively prevented the police from supporting her request for a management move.
The resident contacted the landlord between 7 February and 20 February 2023. She said:
1. She had not submitted a diary of events that week, as she had not witnessed any ASB other than the smell of cannabis from the neighbour’s address on a frequent basis.
2. There had been no updates on the case or on the progress of mediation as previously agreed.
3. The amount of compensation offered was not adequate considering their experience their experience for the past year.
4. The landlord had not contacted her regarding damage caused to her car by the neighbour and her phone calls had not been returned.
On 22 February 2023 the landlord apologised to the resident for the delay in contacting her and advised that it had made arrangements for the ASB investigators to visit her within a week. It said it could not disclose details of any discussions about the neighbour’s tenancy. The resident responded that it should be able to provide updates on any discussions held with agencies. She further said that it had failed to ensure that she was receiving weekly contacts as promised.
On 24 February 2023, the landlord apologised for the time it was taking to resolve the matter. It said it had arranged for weekly contact to be made and regular updates on the progression of the case.
In an internal email dated 24 February 2023, the landlord noted that there were instances in the case management where it had failed to take tenancy action. It said it would need to agree a mutually convenient time to meet with the resident. It said it had to be clear on the reason for the visit, action plan and next steps. It said it also needed to plan weekly verbal and written updates to ensure it was providing the correct support to the resident and her family
On 20 March 2023 the resident asked the landlord what it was doing to investigate the issues reported.
The resident noted in a diary sheet completed on 22 March 2023 that the neighbour’s children continued to taunt her by calling her names.
On 24 March 2023 the landlord provided an update on its actions to the resident. It said:
1. Warnings had been issued but it could not disclose confidential information.
2. It was arranging a full review of her case with its solicitors to review all actions taken and the next steps.
3. The multi-agency meeting with other statutory agencies was progressing and it was waiting for updates from those involved.
4. It had requested information from the police concerning the neighbours.
The resident reported further incidents and disturbance in the neighbourhood to the landlord on 27 March 2023 and 12 April 2023.
On 18 April 2023, the resident reported that she had not been receiving the weekly calls or updates promised. The landlord apologised that it had missed the previous week’s call.
In an internal email dated 26 April 2023, the landlord said it telephoned the neighbour to discuss the allegations against them and about drug use. It noted that the neighbour said they had not contacted the resident, and it advised them to ensure this continued.
The resident contacted the landlord on 27 April 2023 and asked for an update on the interview with the neighbour. The landlord responded that it was unable to disclose the details of the interview. It further said there was not sufficient evidence to take any enforcement action against the neighbour, but it would continue to provide support on the case.
On 28 April 2023, the landlord informed the resident that the neighbour had been warned off and advised in the strongest terms not to engage in any contact with her or other neighbours. It said it would be visiting the neighbourhood over the next two weeks to speak with other residents about the ongoing issues and how to address them. It said it would also be looking into other tenancy management issues in the area.
On 30 May 2023, the resident asked why the landlord had not taken action against the neighbours due to ongoing harassment. She reported a further incident of the neighbour harassing her husband as he left the house. She said no action had been taken despite the previous reports made and this had only led the neighbours to believe they could get away with their actions.
The resident contacted this Service on 21 June 2023 and reported that she continued to experience harassment by the neighbours.
On 7 July 2023, the landlord informed the resident that it was conducting an independent review of her case which may take some time as it would be reviewing over 400 pieces of evidence.
On 12 July 2023, the resident said the police had recorded an incident as offence of harassment against her.
The police contacted the landlord on 12 July 2023 to request a meeting to discuss the case. The landlord responded with its availability on 13 July 2023. It also asked for a statement or record of their involvement regarding the reports made by the resident.
The police wrote to resident on 16 July 2023 and advised her that it had spoken to the neighbour and warned them regarding their actions and the potential consequences.
The resident sent an email to the landlord on 17 July 2023 expressing her dissatisfaction with its overall handling of the reports of ASB.
On 19 July 2023, the resident informed the landlord that the police attended the neighbour’s property and confirmed that it smelled of cannabis.
On 5 October 2023, the landlord advised the resident that it was still in the process of reviewing the evidence to create a chronology of the events.
On 30 October 2023, the landlord advised the resident that it was working on a draft notice of possession to the neighbours.
On 15 December 2023, the landlord served a notice of seeking possession on the neighbour. The landlord noted in the notice served that the history of ASB had started as far back as 22 February 2022 up until 01 October 2023.

Assessment and findings

The Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles are:
1. be fair
2. put things right
3. learn from outcomes.
This Service will apply these principles when considering whether any redress is appropriate and proportionate for any maladministration or service failure identified.

Response to the resident’s reports of anti-social behaviour (ASB) by her neighbours.

In cases relating to ASB, it is important to clarify that this Service’s role is not to ascertain whether ASB occurred or not, or who is responsible, but to determine whether the landlord responded to reports of ASB received in the timeframe of a complaint, and assess whether the landlord has followed proper procedure, good practice, and behaved reasonably, taking account of all the circumstances of the case.
It is clear from the reports made to the landlord that the resident and her family had gone through a difficult time since they started to report ASB in February 2022. Despite several reports made by the resident over many months and CCTV recordings provided to assist the landlord with its investigation, there is no evidence of an active investigation regarding her concerns. Whilst its policy states that it aims to tackle ASB through prevention, early intervention, partnership working and enforcement it failed to implement this in practice.
The landlord should have initiated mediation in the early stages to try to manage the situation to prevent the breakdown in the relationship between the resident and her neighbour. The landlord advised this Service that it was unable to progress with mediation, as it did not gain agreement from both parties. However, it failed to inform the resident of this hinderance, despite her repeated request for an update on mediation. This is not appropriate and would have caused the resident distress and frustration.
The ASB, Crime and Policing Act 2014, outlines that when responding to reports of ASB, agencies must consider the effect that such behaviour has on victims and witnesses. It also states that agencies should recognise and consider the debilitating impact the persistent or repeated ASB can have on victims, more so over a period of time. The landlord did not consider the impact of the ASB on the resident or her family.
Despite the landlord’s ASB policy being in place, this Service has not received any evidence that the landlord assessed the resident’s or her son’s vulnerability at any point in the case. The resident outlined the impact that the ongoing ASB was having on her son but it failed to take this into consideration. This Service has not seen evidence of a risk assessment as noted in its ASB policy or that it considered whether it would be appropriate to offer the resident additional support while the ASB was ongoing. Whilst its ASB policy states that it will assess any vulnerabilities within a household to establish if additional support is needed, the landlord failed to adhere to it. This is a significant failing on the landlord’s part. We have seen from the evidence that the resident advised the landlord that she and her family were deprived of the basic privileges of the enjoyment of her home for over 11 months.
Although the landlord informed this Service that multi-agency meetings had taken place we have not seen adequate evidence to support this. On the contrary, the evidence shows that the resident invested a vast amount of time in pursuing the matter with the landlord and in liaising with the police to find a resolution to the ASB. However, there is evidence of little or no communication in terms of how it would be dealing with the issues being reported. This would have caused the resident further distress, frustration, and inconvenience.
In its stage 1 response to the resident’s complaint, the landlord failed to acknowledge that it had not followed its ASB policy or procedure in the handling of the reports. This led to further delays and missed opportunities in finding an early resolution to the issues being reported. The landlord learned from this error and admitted that it had got things wrong in its stage 2 response. It apologised to the resident and assured her that it would review her case and provide updates on any actions agreed. However, this was quite late in the process, 11 months after the resident initially contacted the landlord for support. It also offered £200 in compensation for the overall failings, but the amount offered does not reflect the level of distress, inconvenience, frustration and time and trouble to the resident.
Although the landlord recognised that it failed to deal with the ASB reports appropriately, the evidence suggests there was a further delay of approximately 6 months before it actively commenced a review of the case. In response to our request for evidence, the landlord advised this Service that it met with the resident on 18 July 2023, apologised to her and acknowledged that it had failed to follow up the recommended actions in its stage 2 response.
It said it explained its commitment to ensuring the failings would not continue and agreed the following actions:
1. Complete an evidence review of the resident’s ASB case concerning her neighbour and arrange to meet with her to discuss the findings.
2. Identify another ASB officer to take over the case management due to her expression of dissatisfaction at the previous officer’s handling of the case.
This Service notes from the evidence that the above actions were completed as agreed with the resident. The landlord further advised that following its review, it identified there had been over 30 breaches of the tenancy by the neighbour which met the threshold for the initiation of possession proceedings. It said it had a virtual meeting with the resident on 24 October 2023 and informed her of the outcome of the review. It concluded that the neighbour moved to another property early 2024 and it planned to re-let the vacated property sensitively.
The Ombudsman welcomes the steps taken by the landlord in rebuilding its relationship and trust with the resident. However, the resident and her family would not have gone through such a difficult experience of ASB, for an extended period of over 11 months, had it taken this approach earlier. It is for this reason that this Service finds maladministration in its handling of her reports of ASB.

Handling of the associated complaint

The landlord’s response to the stage 2 complaint was slightly delayed (by 5 working days). She submitted the complaint on 6 December 2022, but the response was not issued until 12 January 2023. However, the landlord managed her expectations as it informed her in its acknowledgement letter to her on 14 December 2022 that it would respond by 12 January 2022. Whilst there is no evidence of a significant detriment as a result of the delay, the landlord should have acknowledged it and offered apologies to the resident for any inconvenience caused.
As noted earlier in our assessment of the landlord’s handling of the ASB reports, there is evidence of some learning in its stage 2 response, but it failed to address all the points raised in the complaint. The resident’s complaint against a member of staff about their comment that they should accept ASB as social housing tenants was not addressed. It failed to comment on the resident’s concern that the member of staff she complained about had responded to the stage 1 complaint. Also, it did not address the unanswered point from the stage 1 complaint that one of its staff had hindered her request for a management move. The landlord also failed to manage the commitments made at the end of the complaints process. This is unreasonable.
This Service’s complaint handling code (published March 2022) states that landlords must address all points raised in the complaint and provide clear reasons for any decisions, referencing the relevant policy, law, and good practice where appropriate. Failure to address these issues would have caused the resident some level of frustration and uncertainty. This is not appropriate and does not show that an impartial investigation of the complaint was conducted in adherence to its complaints policy. Considering the above, there is evidence of maladministration in its handling of the complaint.

Determination (decision)

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of anti-social behaviour (ASB).
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Reasons

The landlord failed to adhere to its ASB policy in its handling of the resident’s concerns despite repeated contacts and evidence provided. This meant that the resident and her family were left unsupported for a significant period of time.
The landlord did not acknowledge the delay in responding to the stage 2 complaint and it failed to address all the points raised by the resident. It failed to manage the commitments made in its stage 2 response.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report:
1. A senior member of staff of the landlord’s staff should apologise to the resident in writing.
2. The landlord should pay the resident a total amount of £1100 broken down as:
  1. £500 for the distress, frustration and time and trouble to the resident for failures identified in its handling of the reports of ASB.
  2. £400 for the frustration and inconvenience to the resident for the failures in its complaint handling.
  3. £200 previously offered to her if it has not yet been paid.
3. The landlord should provide this Service evidence of any additional training offered to staff that deal with ASB cases as stated in its stage 2 response.
4. Share this report with members of staff who deal with complaints to ensure that they adhere to its internal policies when handling complaints. It should also reiterate the importance of following its ASB guidelines to ensure that vulnerable residents are risk assessed for any additional support they need.

Recommendations

The landlord should implement a vulnerable resident’s policy if it does not have one in place.