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

Camden Council (202226292)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202226292

Camden Council

28 November 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

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s communication with the resident following reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB).

Background

  1. The resident is a leaseholder. The landlord is a local council. The lease began in November 1998.
  2. The resident complained to the landlord on 2 August 2022. His complaint was about the landlord’s lack of communication with him, following confirmation it was seeking legal advice on the eviction of his neighbour. The neighbour is a tenant of the landlord.
  3. The landlord provided its stage 1 response on 12 August 2022 where it explained it had taken steps with its legal team however, it could not share the information due to it being confidential information about the neighbour.
  4. On 17 August 2022, the resident escalated his complaint. In its stage 2 response dated 15 September 2022, the landlord acknowledged it had poorly communicated with the resident, despite there being no updates to provide and apologised. It explained it was building a legal case however, as the neighbour was vulnerable, it would take time. It agreed to provide regular updates going forward.

Scope of investigation

  1. Paragraph 42.a. of the Scheme states that the Ombudsman may not consider complaints which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion are made prior to having exhausted a member’s complaints procedure, unless there is evidence of a complaint-handling failure, and the Ombudsman is satisfied that the member has not taken action within a reasonable timescale.
  2. The complaint duly made to this Service was dated 2 August 2022. It concerned the landlord’s lack of feedback following it seeking legal advice to evict his neighbour, and a request for an update on the steps it had taken. This Service has seen evidence the resident made a new complaint to the landlord on 18 February 2024 about its handling of the reported ASB. On 18 April 2024 the resident contacted the landlord to advise he believed his contact with the Ombudsman would provide a formal response to the concerns he complained about, effectively withdrawing his second complaint.
  3. This Service appreciates the concerns raised by the resident about ongoing ASB and wishes to investigate the landlord’s handling of these concerns. However, for this Service to investigate a complaint, our jurisdiction requires it to have completed the landlord’s informal complaints procedure. This ensures the landlord has had the opportunity to response to the resident’s concerns and resolve the complaint. As the resident’s complaint dated 18 February 2024 has not yet received a formal response, we cannot investigate the landlord’s handling of the ongoing ASB within this investigation.
  4. This investigation will consider the landlord’s communication with the resident as outlined in his formal complaint dated 2 August 2022.
  5. The landlord should reopen the resident’s complaint dated 18 February 2024 and provide a formal response. Once the landlord’s informal complaints procedure has been completed, the resident should refer his complaint to this Service for investigation should he be dissatisfied with the landlord’s responses.

Assessment and findings

  1. The Ombudsman has not seen the neighbour’s tenancy agreement. However, it is likely to contain standard clauses regarding not causing ASB and nuisance. Moreover, nuisance is a ground for possession for a secure tenancy and will be governed by the Housing Act 1985.
  2. The landlord’s decision not to share confidential information about the neighbour with the resident was appropriate. Given the resident was aware of the neighbour’s identity, sharing much of the information he requested would have contravened the general data protection regulations (GDPR) and therefore unlawful. However, the landlord should have explained this to the resident sooner to manage his expectations.
  3. On 6 June 2022, the landlord requested all evidence to be provided within 24 hours from the resident, so it could be provided to its legal team to consider eviction action. This Service appreciates that tenancy evictions are at times complex, often require substantial evidence and can be lengthy, especially in cases where there are known vulnerabilities. However, the resident could only rely on what the landlord advised him and the references to legal action may have raised the resident’s expectations.
  4. The landlord acknowledged in its complaint responses that it had failed to update the resident, despite there being no updates to provide. While it did make a referral to its legal team and confirmed in its stage 2 response that it was satisfied it was taking reasonable steps to progress the matter, it still had a duty to the resident to provide an update on the actions it had taken.
  5. It should have also asked the resident for updates on any further incidents, set out timescales for the proposed legal action and checked the resident’s welfare, as it was aware the ASB was ongoing. Additionally, it should have assessed if the situation required any other intervention such as target hardening, further warnings or legal action such as an injunction.
  6. This Service appreciates that some of the information could not be shared due to confidentiality. However, in its stage 2 response it explained its policy was to provide informal and then formal warnings to an alleged perpetrator of ASB, before considering legal action. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to have confirmed whether it completed these policy steps in response to the reports of ASB.
  7. Additionally, the landlord could have explained how it would respond to future incidents of ASB including what it would do to investigate, monitor and manage this in line with its policy. This would have managed the resident’s expectations the landlord was taking the reports seriously, rather than letting the ASB continue without intervention, while it awaited further legal advice. The landlord could also have managed the resident’s expectations with an action plan, setting out how it would manage the case. The landlord did not treat the resident reasonably and this was evidence of a service failure.
  8. There was no evidence the landlord asked the resident to continue to report further incidents, provided information on how it would manage these or provided evidence of collation tools commonly used by landlords such as diary sheets. This suggested the landlord did not take a proactive approach to supporting the resident where there was ongoing ASB, despite awaiting legal intervention. In combination with the lack of communication, this was likely to have caused the resident distress and inconvenience. In the Ombudsman’s opinion, the landlord’s communication with the resident following reports of ASB was a service failure.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure by the landlord in its communication with the resident following reports of ASB.

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. A senior member of the landlord’s staff should apologise to the resident for the failings identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by its poor communication.
    3. Provide the resident with an action plan of steps it will take to manage the ongoing reports of ASB.