Bristol City Council (202309819)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202309819

Bristol City Council

4 February 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 the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB).

Background

2. The resident has occupied the property, a 2 bedroom bungalow, on a secure tenancy since October 2017. The landlord is a local authority.
3. The resident complained on 24 April 2023 that a member of landlord staff who had attended her property that day to discuss reports of ASB, had said she ought to “get on with my life” and “get therapy for my mental health”. She also said they did not speak to the alleged perpetrator (the neighbour) that day having said they would and said to “just get out there and enjoy the garden” despite the neighbour hanging over the fence. The resident felt the member of staff was condescending and nothing had been resolved as she was made to feel she was at fault.
4. The complaint was acknowledged on 26 April 2023 and a stage 1 response issued on 4 May 2023. The landlord apologised if the resident felt her concerns had not been taken seriously. It said it had found no evidence of the neighbour having fitted CCTV, something she had been concerned about, and the comments made had been well intentioned and not meant to be upsetting. It explained no action had been taken against the neighbour as the threshold had not been met, but she should report any new incidents.
5. On 18 June 2023 the resident reported hearing her neighbour laughing and seeing a boy peering over the top of the fence, which led to her having a panic attack. She also caught someone looking through the gap in the hedge in the corner of her garden and said someone had cut her wisteria. She felt her complaints had not been taken seriously enough and wanted CCTV fitted.
6. The landlord responded the following day, as follows:
   1. It again apologised if the resident felt her reports were not being taken seriously.
   2. It could not issue a warning to the neighbour for a child laughing in the garden and, although the resident said she had evidence of her neighbour peering through the fence, it could not see that on the photographs submitted.
   3. The neighbour’s fence seemed higher than hers and solidly built, which it hoped offered a degree of privacy.
   4. It did not have funding to install CCTV, and there were rules about its use. The resident had thought the neighbour had CCTV pointing at her property, which made her feel she was being harassed. It found no evidence of CCTV being used, but pointed out that the neighbour would feel the same if it installed CCTV pointing to their garden.
7. The resident replied on 19 June 2023 asking for her complaint to be escalated to stage 2 as she felt the comments made to her amounted to defamation and discrimination. She reiterated her concerns and said CCTV could be installed and mediation was unacceptable as she felt she was being stalked and harassed by the neighbour, claiming they had cut her wisteria and moved a plastic hedge she had put in place.
8. The resident and neighbour entered into a Good Neighbour Agreement with the police on 29 June 2023, stating they would avoid confrontation with one another.
9. The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 17 July 2023. It again apologised for the resident being offended by the comments made to her, and explained the intention was to suggest ways of her receiving support for her mental health. It was not meant to attribute blame to her. It explained any action it took needed to be proportional to any breach of tenancy. It had spoken with the neighbour, who could trim the wisteria if it was on their side, and it had offered mediation which had been declined; so a decision was made to take no further action.
10. The resident has since told this Service that the landlord has not done enough, and she has installed CCTV herself as she says she is being stalked. She has also reported the neighbour to the police for following her in a car and does not feel safe sitting in her garden.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

11. In the interests of investigating issues that are still ‘live’, it is our practice to limit the scope of our investigations to a reasonable period prior to the formal complaint being made. The resident made a complaint of a similar nature in 2021, but matters escalated in April 2023 when the complaint to the landlord was made. While earlier reports provide important context to the current complaint, this investigation is only focused on events from April 2023 onwards.

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

12. It is clear the resident has been upset by the actions of the neighbour and has brought a number of issues to the landlord’s attention. It is important to explain that it is not our role to determine whether there has been ASB or not, but to decide whether the landlord has dealt with matters appropriately, and in line with its policies and procedures.
13. The first point to address relates to comments made to the resident by a member of staff on 24 April 2023. The resident was clearly offended by what was said but, without being present, it is not possible to know in what context the comments were made. When her complaint was made, the landlord apologised more than once and explained the member of staff had intended on helping the resident and had not meant to cause offence.
14. The comments made the resident feel that the landlord did not care about the issues she reported, but the landlord reassured her that was not the case. Its ASB policy says it may suggest that someone get support and this may help explain the landlord’s position. In any event, it is accepted the resident was upset by what happened, but as soon as this was brought to the landlord’s attention, it rightly apologised and addressed the issue straight away which was appropriate and reasonable.
15. The landlord’s ASB policy explains that ASB can be conduct that has caused, or is likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress to any person, and it is evident the resident has been upset by the actions of the neighbour. Therefore, it was right that the landlord dealt with it as ASB. The policy goes on to say that the landlord has a duty to support the resident and the evidence shows it has done that.
16. The landlord took the resident’s reports seriously and encouraged her to report matters not only to it, but to the police, as required. The ASB policy refers to the term ‘intervention’ and says it is used to describe action the landlord may take, including mediation, warnings, referrals for support and neighbourhood agreements.
17. The evidence shows the landlord offered mediation but the resident declined it. It sent and reviewed diary sheets from the resident as well as reviewing photographic evidence sent in support of her allegations. Having reviewed these, it spoke with the neighbour as well as the resident about behaviours and investigated the allegations. It provided guidance to the parties, all of which is in line with its ASB policy. However, there was little more it could do because there was not enough evidence to justify taking any more action, and this was put in writing as it should have been.
18. The landlord’s ASB policy states that any action it takes against a perpetrator needs to be proportionate. This was explained to the resident when she asked for it to fund the installation of CCTV cameras at her property. The landlord explained it did not have the funds to do that and sensibly highlighted that if she felt it was inappropriate for her neighbour to have CCTV directed at the property, it would not be reasonable for her to have it either. With the landlord having offered mediation, issued and reviewed diary sheets, spoken with the neighbour, and considered photographic evidence, there was insufficient evidence of ASB to warrant further action. Therefore, its decision to not fund CCTV was reasonable.
19. The resident has alleged that the neighbour is stalking her, and it was right for this to be reported to the police. The evidence shows the police have tried to help resolve matters by arranging a Good Neighbour Agreement between the parties. However, if the resident is still experiencing similar problems, she should report these to the police.
20. The same is true for the ASB. The landlord has made it clear to the resident that she should continue to report any issues of ASB and it can then monitor the situation and decide what future action, if any, it may need to take.
21. Based on the evidence provided, the landlord has complied with its obligations under its ASB policy. It has taken the reports seriously, sought and considered evidence, taken steps to address it, and explained its limitations. Therefore, there was no maladministration.
22. The landlord’s ASB policy does allow the resident to potentially activate a Community Trigger in order to request a review of her case if she feels that no effective action has been taken to resolve it. It is not clear if this has already been done, but if not, if the resident feels she may meet that criteria, it is open for her to explore this as an option.

Determination

23. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of reports of the resident’s reports of ASB.