Applications are open to join the next Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel – find out more Housing Ombudsman Resident Panel.

Birmingham City Council (202313281)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202313281

Birmingham City Council

10 June 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. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB).

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord. The property is a 2-bedroom maisonette within a building managed by the landlord. The landlord is a local authority.
  2. The resident raised a complaint, via her MP, on 3 October 2023. Concerns were raised about a trade button being used by youths to enter the building. She reported the perpetrators fly tipping, littering, and using drugs.
  3. The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 23 October 2023. It said:
    1. The resident had reported ASB issues since 2022 and it had shared reports with the police who conducted patrols in the area and escorted unauthorised youths from the building.
    2. When it received reports of littering, it liaised this with its team to have items promptly removed.
    3. The ASB case remained open and it was working with the police to find a positive resolution.
    4. It had followed its procedures and taken appropriate action to respond to the reports of ASB. It said it had conducted visits to observe ASB, liaised with the resident to discuss incidents and gather evidence, it spoke to the alleged perpetrators and issued a warning letter. It did not uphold the resident’s complaint.
  4. The resident escalated her complaint, via her MP, on 25 October 2023. The MP said the landlord had allowed the ASB to continue for a number of years without taking substantial action.
  5. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 8 November 2023. It said:
    1. It accepted the ASB was reported in 2022 and it was not always possible to find an immediate solution.
    2. The ASB had been managed in accordance with its ASB policies and procedures.
    3. It set out a chronology of events from January 2022 which included contacting the alleged perpetrator, providing the resident with an action plan, escalating the matter to its Enforcement Team, and conducting joint visits with the police.
    4. It issued a final warning letter to the alleged perpetrator on 14 March 2023 and offered them support in May 2023.
    5. Discussions were ongoing with the police. The ASB case remained open and under investigation. It did not uphold the complaint.
  6. The resident remained unhappy with the landlord’s response and repeated how she felt the landlord had let the ASB issues continue for a number of years without taking substantial action.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident has said that she made reports of ASB from 2021 onwards, this included complaints about the cleanliness of the building and her car tyres being damaged around August 2022, amongst other issues. In such circumstances, the Ombudsman would usually expect the resident to have raised the issues as a formal complaint within a reasonable time, usually 12 months of matters arising. Issues that were not raised as a complaint within a reasonable time have not been considered within this report. As such, the investigation will be limited to events from 12 months prior to the resident’s complaint from October 2023. Events from before October 2022, may be referred to within this report for background purposes only.
  2. The resident has told this Service that her car tyres were damaged by the alleged perpetrators at least twice. It is unclear when these events occurred, the timeline of events show this was before October 2022 (as mentioned above) and after the landlord’s stage 2 response from November 2023.
  3. In the interest of fairness, the scope of this investigation is limited to the issues raised during the resident’s formal complaint and the landlord’s stage 2 response from November 2023. This is because the landlord needs to be given a fair opportunity to investigate and respond to any further complaints as part of its internal complaints process, prior to the involvement of this Service. As such, issues relating to damage to the resident’s car will not be considered within this report. This report will consider the complaint that formed part of the landlord’s stage 2 response from 8 November 2023.
  4. It is important to explain that it is not the Ombudsman’s role to decide whether an incident amounts to ASB or whether ASB had occurred. Instead it is the role of this Service to consider the actions taken by the landlord when reports of alleged ASB have been made to it and to decide whether those actions were appropriate or reasonable in the circumstances.

Handling of reports of ASB

  1. The landlord’s tenants handbook says it is against the law to smoke in shared areas inside the block, including landings and stairways. For ASB, it says it will take action whenever possible, including working with other agencies (the police) to deal with the behaviour. If it receives an ASB complaint it will investigate the problem and agree an action plan. In certain cases, it may set up ‘acceptable behaviour contracts’. If ASB does not stop, it will take legal action. It says it offers support to everyone affected by ASB.
  2. For situations where perpetrators are unknown, its handbook says it will conduct a full investigation to build a picture that may tell it who the perpetrator is. This could involve speaking with neighbours, local housing staff and checking any CCTV cameras in the area.
  3. The landlord’s ASB policy categorises ASB complaints into 3 areas. It lists a type C category as minor ASB, this includes misuse of public/communal space, loitering and fly tipping. It says:
    1. For these reports it will make contact within 10 working days.
    2. It will interview the complainant and agree an action plan with details of frequency of contact to manage expectations.
    3. Where it has substantial evidence of ASB it will make a decision about appropriate action which can include issuing warnings.
    4. It will regularly monitor each case and keep in regular contact with the complainant.
    5. The closure of a case would be agreed and confirmed in writing.
  4. For background purposes, in January 2022 the landlord conducted a risk assessment following the resident’s reports of ASB. This included reports of smoking drugs and littering within the building. It issued a warning letter to the neighbour and contacted the police to patrol the area. At that time, the following action plan was agreed:
    1. It would contact the neighbour about the reported ASB.
    2. It would contact the resident on a fortnightly basis to discuss any concerns.
    3. The resident agreed to complete ASB monitoring forms when necessary.
  5. In October 2022 the resident continued to report ASB within the building. The landlord appropriately attempted to arrange a visit with the police and issued a further warning letter to the neighbour. The landlord’s actions were reasonable in the circumstances.          
  6. Despite the landlord issuing warning letters and interviewing other residents within the building, it found there was not enough evidence to identify those responsible for the ASB. The landlord appropriately explained this to the resident in December 2022 and agreed to continue patrols of the building. It also left the ASB case open. The landlord’s actions were reasonable in the circumstances.
  7. Between January and March 2023, the resident continued to report ASB. The landlord appropriately arranged a joint visit with the police and issued a final warning letter to the neighbour. It also took action to remove litter from the building and updated the resident and her MP of this. This was appropriate.
  8. In July 2023 the resident reported further ASB which included being sworn at in front of her young children. She told the landlord of concerns about perpetrators damaging her car, and of her young children witnessing the ASB. She asked it to evict the neighbour. The landlord’s response explained that it had met with the police and put together an action plan. It accepted groups were congregating in the communal areas and explained that it found no link to the neighbour. It encouraged the resident to report incidents to the police. In September 2023, it provided a similar update and added that its caretakers had been monitoring and cleaning communal areas. The resident has said the cleaning issue has been resolved at the building.
  9. It is accepted that the resident’s reports of ASB had been ongoing for some time. The evidence shows the landlord worked with other agencies (the police) to deal with the behaviour, it investigated the reports and agreed an action plan. When it found the perpetrators were unknown, it continued to work with the police and spoke to other residents in attempts to investigate the issue.
  10. However, the landlord failed to consider the support it could provide the resident in light of her ASB reports. While the landlord may not have had substantial evidence to take further action against the perpetrators, it should have considered the support it could provide the resident, as per its policy. It repeatedly missed opportunities to do this and this was not appropriate.
  11. In addition to this, the landlord did not always update the resident as per the timeframes it set within its action plan. If it was unable to continue with fortnightly updates, it should have provided the resident with a revised timeframe to help manage expectations while the ASB case remained open, as per its policy. The landlord’s failure to do this left the resident feeling she had to involve her MP for it to update her. This was not appropriate.
  12. Overall, while the landlord took some positive steps in managing the littering within the building and investigate the reports of ASB. It failed to consider the support it could provide the resident despite knowing unknown perpetrators were regularly entering the building. It did not manage the resident’s expectations on updates as per the timeframe set within its action plan.
  13. The landlord’s missed opportunities within its complaint responses to identify it failings. This was despite the resident repeatedly reporting similar ASB to it over a prolonged time. It is accepted that the resident would have been caused some frustration in the landlord’s handling of the matter and its failure to acknowledge its failings or make attempts to put things right. When considering these points combined, the landlord’s handling of reports of ASB was not appropriate and amounts to maladministration.
  14. When deciding an appropriate remedy, this Service’s remedies guidance has been considered alongside the landlord’s failings. The Ombudsman has decided a compensation payment of £300 is appropriate in the circumstances. This amount falls within the maladministration banding of this Service’s remedies guidance and is to acknowledge the impact the landlord’s failings may have had on the resident. The Ombudsman has made a further order for the landlord to explain its planned approach to the reports of ASB.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of ASB.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Arrange for a manager to apologise to the resident for its handling of reports of ASB.
    2. Pay the resident a total of £300 compensation for the distress, inconvenience, time and trouble caused by its handling of ASB.
    3. To contact the resident about any ongoing ASB at the building, if any. It should explain in writing to the resident and this Service:
      1. Its planned approach to managing the reports of unknown perpetrators entering the building. This includes consideration of how it could make the building more secure to limit entry for unknown persons, if this is not possible it should explain why.
      2. It should explain the support it will provide the resident while the issues remain ongoing.