Aster Group Limited (202327863)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202327863

Aster Group Limited

15 April 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of anti-social behaviour (ASB).
The Ombudsman has also looked at the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Background

The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord’s since 2022. She lives with her son in the property, a 3-bed house. Due to access restrictions on the road, parking is on driveways only.
On 5 May 2023 the resident reported an incident with her neighbour to the landlord. She reported a further 19 incidents with her neighbour between June and September 2023.
The resident complained to the landlord on 20 September 2023. She felt it had not acted with her neighbour following her reports of ASB.
On 24 October 2023 the landlord responded at stage 1 of its internal complaints process. It did not uphold the resident’s complaint.
On the same day the resident escalated her complaint. She said again she was unhappy with how the landlord had handled the reported ASB.
The landlord replied at stage 2 of its internal complaints process on 13 November 2023. Again, it did not uphold the resident’s complaint.
The resident brought her complaint to us. On 18 March 2025 she said the ASB between her and the neighbour had been resolved.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB

On 5 May 2023 the resident reported to the landlord that her neighbour’s children had been riding on a motorbike with no tax or insurance. She also said they had parked inconsiderately in the road, blocking the access to her driveway.
The landlord responded to the resident on 11 May 2023. It said it had sent a letter to the neighbour regarding the incidents.
The landlord’s ASB policy states:
1. It defines ASB as “engaging in or threatening to engage in conduct causing or likely to cause a nuisance or annoyance to persons engaged in lawful activities”.
2. When ASB is reported it will do the following:
  1. Complete a risk assessment form.
  2. Send the complainant an acknowledgement with an agreed action plan.
  3. Interview the complainant over the phone or in person.
  4. Consider if “nuisance diaries” should be used.
  5. Provide or signpost the complainant to support.
  6. It will consider the use of mediation between parties and tools such as a “noise app” to record evidence.
The resident reported the following further incidents:
1. On 15 May 2023 the neighbour was illegally riding a motorbike and having a street party that blocked the entrance of the road.
2. The resident called the police on 18 May 2023 after the neighbour behaved in an aggressive way towards her.
3. On 19 May 2023 the neighbour’s son swore at her.
4. An incident on 28 May 2023 involved swearing and name calling by the neighbour’s children to the resident. She also said there was rubbish on the street left by the neighbour that she was picking up.
Around 4 weeks after the resident first reported an incident to the landlord, it visited her neighbour on 2 June 2023 to discuss the alleged ASB.
The resident reported the following incidents:
1. On 3 June 2023 she reported verbal abuse, inconsiderate parking, and intimidating behaviour by her neighbour.
2. The neighbour chopping down communal trees on 5 June 2023.
3. On 6 June 2023 the resident said the neighbour was burning green wood and she had to keep her windows and doors closed. She said the incidents were taking its toll on her mental health.
The landlord sent a letter to all properties in the road on 8 June 2023. It said residents should always keep dogs on leads and parking was not permitted on the road. The landlord said there must be access to the road and to the front of properties at all times.
The resident reported on 19 June 2023 that she was unable to open her windows again due to the neighbour “burning things”. She said her son was called names and his bike was damaged by the neighbour’s children. The resident also said they had continued to park inconsiderately on the road.
On 21 June 2023 the resident told the landlord she had been assaulted by her neighbour and had reported this to the police. The resident chased a response from the landlord the next day.
The landlord responded to the resident via email on 23 June 2023. It said the following:
1. It would await the outcome of the police investigation into the assault by her neighbour.
2. The landlord asked the resident to consider mediation between herself and the neighbour.
3. It wanted the resident and her neighbour to sign an acceptable behaviour contract (ABC). (An ABC is a voluntary contract used to manage behaviour in ASB cases).
The resident replied via email on the same day and asked the landlord why it had not rung her about the ASB and the assault by her neighbour. She said she was not willing to try mediation with her neighbours. The resident was concerned for her and her family’s safety and wanted the landlord to visit her to discuss the case.
The resident reported the following to the landlord:
1. On 24 June 2023 the neighbour was verbally abusive to the resident.
2. On 26 June 2023 her son said he wanted to kill himself due to bullying at school by one of the neighbour’s children. The resident said he was afraid to go anywhere in the neighbourhood by himself. She also reported the neighbour’s dog defecating on her lawn.
3. On 29 July 2023 the neighbour had been confrontational towards the resident and her son was being bullied by them.
4. The neighbour’s children called the resident “fat” on 30 June 2023.
5. On 6 July 2023 the neighbour’s son was verbally abusive to the resident. She said the neighbour was still parking on the road and she was unable to spend any time outside her house due to the neighbour.
The landlord told us due to the language used by the neighbour’s son on 6 July 2023 the case “met the threshold” and was moved over to its ASB team. An official ASB case was then opened.
The resident told the landlord the neighbour started an argument with her on 9 July 2023 over car parking in the road. On 10 July 2023 the landlord visited the neighbour again to discuss the ASB. The neighbour said it understood the behaviour of their children was their responsibility and they would sign an ABC. They also made counter allegations against the resident involving inconsiderate parking and harassment.
The landlord arranged to visit the resident on 13 July 2023 but had to reschedule. It visited her on 2 August 2023 and noted she was “very agitated”.
On 15 and 25 August 2023 the resident reported noise nuisance and abuse shouted by her neighbour. The landlord responded to the resident on 26 August 2023. It said the resident could download the “noise app” to record evidence of noise nuisance.
On 31 August 2023 the police said due to a lack of evidence no further action would be taken on the resident’s claim of assault by her neighbour.
The resident complained to the landlord on 20 September 2023. She said the landlord had not acted on her ASB complaint. She thought the ASB officer had not taken action and requested a new ASB officer to deal with the case.
On 26 September 2023, around 4 months after the resident initially reported allegations of ASB, the landlord completed an impact assessment form on the resident. It also asked if she needed signposting to other agencies for support.
The resident’s neighbour signed an ABC provided by the landlord on 29 September 2023. The ABC said the neighbour agreed to the following:
1. Considerate and respectful behaviour towards others.
2. No blocking of the road or parking spaces.
3. To not allow nuisance caused by pets.
4. Have no contact with the resident and not cause annoyance or disturbance to others.
The landlord responded at stage 1 of its internal complaints process on 24 October 2023. It said the following:
1. Counter allegations had been made by the neighbour about the resident.
2. She had declined the offer of mediation with her neighbour. Its view was it had responded appropriately and the “interventions proposed” by it were reasonable, considering the evidence.
3. The landlord did not uphold the resident’s complaint. It said it would not allocate a new ASB officer to the case.
A review of the landlord’s stage 1 response shows it detailed what action it had taken to tackle the ASB.
However, the response failed to acknowledge the following aspects that were lacking from its handling of her reports of ASB:
1. The landlord delayed allocating an ASB officer and opening an ASB case for the resident. It took around 2 months from when the resident first reported an incident and around 33 working days after she reported she was assaulted by the neighbour.
2. It took around 3 months from the first reported incident for the landlord to visit the resident, and communication was via email only. It did not call the resident to discuss the ASB despite her requests to do so. This was a breach of its policy to “interview the complainant over the phone or in person”.
3. The resident expressed concerns for both her and her son’s mental health. However, there was around a 4-month delay by the landlord to complete a risk assessment form with the resident. It also delayed by around 4 months to signpost her for support for her mental health. It took those actions only after the resident had raised her complaint. These were both failures to comply with its policy to provide signposting to support and risk assess within a reasonable timeframe.
4. The landlord did not communicate an agreed ASB action plan to the resident or offer her a nuisance diary to fill out. The failure to do so on both occasions was contrary to its ASB policy.
The resident escalated her complaint the same day as the landlord’s stage 1 response. The resident also said the ASB officer had been aggressive towards her during the home visit 2 months earlier.
On 13 November 2023 the landlord responded at stage 2 of its internal complaints process. It said the following:
1. In response to the resident’s claim about its staff conduct, at a planned visit 2 months earlier, its staff said the resident had shouted at them and would not allow the visit to take place.
2. The landlord said the ASB was 2 neighbours who did not get along.
3. It said it had followed its ASB procedure and did not uphold the resident’s complaint.
The landlord’s stage 2 response did not address or identify any of the limitations of its initial actions. Or the failures to follow its ASB policy that were identified in the earlier analysis of its stage 1 response.
In summary, the landlord conducted some actions that it was required to do as per its ASB policy, however, these were significantly delayed. This delay to effectively manage the resident’s reports will have led to distress and inconvenience for the resident.
Through the complaints process the landlord did not recognise the failings in its handling of the alleged ASB and no offer of redress was made. This leads to a determination of maladministration and the landlord is ordered to pay compensation of £500 for the impact of the landlord’s failings. This amount is in line with our remedy’s guidance of a failing that adversely affected the resident, and the landlord failed to acknowledge its failings.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaint

On 17 July 2023 the resident complained to the landlord. The landlord did not action or respond to this complaint. The resident complained again on 20 September 2023. She said she had raised an earlier complaint but had no response.
The landlord emailed the resident on 11 October 2023. It said she would receive her response within the next 10 working days. This was within the timeframe stated in its policy. However, it did not acknowledge the delay to her previous complaint raised around 3 months earlier.
The landlord responded at stage 1 of its internal complaints process on 24 October 2023. This was around 24 working days after she raised her complaint for the second time. This was a delay of 14 working days when compared to the 10 working days stated in the landlord’s complaint policy.
On the same day the resident escalated her complaint. Within her escalation she raised concerns about the ASB officer handling the case. The resident said the ASB officer had been unprofessional and aggressive during a visit.
The landlord responded at stage 2 of its internal complaints process on 13 November 2023 around 14 working days later. This was within the 20-working day timeframe stated in its complaints policy and was therefore appropriate.
However, the landlord addressed the complaint point raised about the behaviour of the ASB officer within its stage 2 response. Paragraph 5.7 of the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code (the Code) 2022 states the landlord should raise a new complaint if a new complaint point is raised and the stage 1 response has already been issued. The failure to start a new complaint denied the resident the opportunity to escalate her complaint and have the landlord’s response reviewed internally as part of its processes. This was unreasonable and prevented the resident from accessing the full extent of the landlord’s complaint process.
In summary, the landlord failed to act on the resident’s first complaint. It then failed to account or acknowledge this error as part of its stage 1 response. The landlord failed to recognise the subsequent delay in responding at stage 1 of its internal complaints process. It also failed to raise a new complaint for the resident regarding her concerns with the ASB officer’s conduct.
These failures lead to a determination of maladministration. An order for £100 compensation to reflect the inconvenience and distress caused by the landlord’s complaint handling is set out below.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the alleged ASB.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Orders

Within the next 4 weeks the landlord must:
1. Provide the resident with a written apology for the failures detailed in this report.
2. Pay the resident £600 compensation, broken down as:
  1. £500 for its handling of the resident’s reports of ASB.
  2. £100 for the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.
  3. The compensation to be paid directly to the resident and not offset against a rent or service charge account.
The landlord should reply to us with evidence of compliance with the orders within the timescales set out above.