Chelmer Housing Partnership Limited (202307215)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202307215

Chelmer Housing Partnership Limited

29 January 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:
1. Handling of the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB) including dumping of rubbish by a neighbour.
2. Complaint handling.

Background

The resident is a leaseholder of the landlord, having purchased the property in November 2009.
The resident’s case relates to ASB from a neighbour (‘the neighbour’) in the form of:
1. Being “unpleasant and threatening” towards the resident.
2. A dog being off lead in the communal area.
3. Dumping rubbish in the communal area which is shared between both the resident and the neighbour.
From the evidence provided it is unclear when the resident first reported rubbish having been dumped in the communal area. The case notes provided show that the landlord tried to contact the resident on 1 and 6 June 2022. On 13 June 2022 the resident reported an accumulation of rubbish in the communal area between the 2 properties. The landlord sent a warning letter to the neighbour the same day.
The landlord contacted the resident on 17 June 2022 explaining the action it had taken. It said it had contacted the neighbour with a deadline to remove the rubbish and would monitor the situation. It also said it had liaised with the police and spoken to the neighbour regarding their behaviour and the dog being off lead. From the evidence provided, it is unclear what the resident had reported in relation to the neighbour’s behaviour, but further reports made showed this to be “intimidating” behaviour.
In July 2022 the resident made 5 reports of ASB. This included rubbish accumulation, dogs off lead and barking, and “intimidating” behaviour such as the neighbour sitting on the resident’s wall, refusing to move and looking over her garden fence. The resident said she felt “scared” and it was having a “detrimental effect” on her mental health. The landlord visited the neighbour twice in July 2022 in relation to the rubbish and discussed means of its disposal. It also discussed the ASB reports, and the neighbour agreed to mediation.
The resident contacted the landlord on 3 August 2022 saying that more rubbish had been left in the communal area. She said that she was liaising with the council in relation to the ASB and was disappointed in the landlord’s failure to deal with the issue. The landlord responded the same day saying that it had been working alongside the council regarding the resident’s complaints, to achieve a “productive and positive resolution”.
In September 2022 the resident reported further items of rubbish being dumped in the communal area. She said that there needed “to be a deterrent to stop this from happening in future”. The case notes show that the landlord arranged for the rubbish to be removed on 17 September 2022 as a “goodwill gesture”.
On 9 February 2023 the resident reported further rubbish accumulation in the communal area to the council. She then raised a stage 1 complaint with the landlord, saying that the accumulation was a breach of the neighbour’s tenancy agreement and was a health and safety hazard. She said that the situation had reoccurred on numerous occasions and the landlord had failed to enforce the terms of the neighbour’s tenancy agreement. She wanted the landlord to find a permanent solution.
The landlord was made aware of the report from the council on 24 February 2023. The landlord then visited the area on 6 March 2023, noting that “the black sacks were well out of the way of the footpath”. It spoke with the neighbour the following day, with the neighbour agreeing to store the sacks in her garden.
The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 7 March 2023. It outlined the action it had taken and said it would speak with the neighbour about the importance of keeping communal areas clear. The resident remained unhappy and requested to escalate the complaint to stage 2 on 15 March 2023. She said that more rubbish had been dumped the day before.
The landlord contacted the resident requesting more information regarding her escalation request. The resident responded on 27 March 2023 saying that she disagreed with the landlord that it had taken appropriate action to address the rubbish accumulation. She said that its tenancy agreement stated rubbish should not be left in communal areas. The landlord held a stage 2 panel meeting on 24 April 2023. The meeting notes said that the rubbish in the communal outside area was discussed, and the effect the situation was having on the resident. They noted that the resident wanted the landlord to take firmer action to stop recurrence of rubbish accumulation.
The landlord contacted the neighbour on 25 April 2023 to discuss the rubbish dumped in the communal area. On 27 April 2023 the resident reported 2 dogs off lead in the communal area and late night noise from arguing. The landlord asked the resident to use a noise app to record further incidents and contacted the neighbour to arrange a home visit.
The landlord’s stage 2 response was sent on 2 May 2023. It reiterated the resident’s concerns and what action she wanted it to take. It said it agreed that leaving rubbish in the communal area “goes against” the tenancy agreement. It said it wanted to “improve” the relationship between the resident and the neighbour and would be visiting the neighbour. It said that the resident had requested compensation for distress and inconvenience, but its compensation policy did not allow for this to be provided for experiencing ASB.

Post complaint

An internal email sent on the same day (2 May 2023) outlined action the landlord should take. This included:
1. Arranging mediation.
2. Meeting with the neighbour to discuss the challenges they faced.
3. Explaining to the neighbour the landlord’s expectations, which included keeping the communal area free from rubbish.
4. Discussing with the “wider team” the importance of understanding the impact of a situation and not considering an incident as a “one off”.
In June 2023 the following events took place:
1. The landlord agreed an action plan with the neighbour that they would not store rubbish in the communal area. Instead it should be kept in their garden and dogs would be kept on a lead.
2. The resident reported the neighbour was drunk sitting on her wall and filming the resident in her front garden.
3. The landlord referred the resident and neighbour for mediation.
4. The resident reported that matters had escalated with the neighbour, and she called the police. She said she felt anxious and wanted the landlord to take the matter seriously.
During recent contact with the resident in January 2025, she said that rubbish had continued to be dumped, and the dogs had remained off lead in the communal area.
The landlord has advised this Service that it has not received any recent reports in relation to this case.

Assessment and findings

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB including dumping of rubbish by a neighbour

The landlord’s ASB policy provides examples of what behaviour it considers to be antisocial. These include, but are not limited to:
1. Verbal and physical abuse.
2. Prolonged and repeated arguing and shouting.
3. Dumping of rubbish/fly tipping.
The landlord’s tenancy policy says that serious and/or persistent ASB, including domestic abuse or harassment, is a breach of tenancy conditions.
The landlord’s neighbourhood policy says that pets must be under control at all times and dogs kept on a lead when in communal areas.
Its compensation policy says that a goodwill gesture may be made if a customer has been inconvenienced due to the way the landlord has delivered a service. It goes on to say the landlord will consider making goodwill gestures if it has failed to meet its published service standards and this failure has caused disturbance or inconvenience to a resident. It says it will not pay compensation for the behaviour of other customers (for example, ASB).
The resident reported that the neighbour had dumped rubbish in the communal area on 13 June 2022. The landlord sent a warning letter to the neighbour the same day. This was appropriate and in line with its ASB policy, which says it will take appropriate action against alleged perpetrators where justified and ensure they are aware of the consequences of their actions. The landlord contacted the resident on 17 June 2023 saying it would also contact the neighbour regarding the dog being off lead in the communal area. This was again an appropriate response, given the neighbourhood policy says that dogs must be kept on a lead when in communal areas.
Following this, the landlord contacted the resident on 17 July 2022. It said that it had liaised with the police regarding the neighbour’s behaviour. It noted that there had been no reports from the resident since April 2022. This Service has not had sight of any records relating to April 2022, so is unable to comment further.
The evidence shows that the resident made 5 reports relating to ASB in July 2022. She explained to the landlord that she felt “scared” and the situation was affecting her mental health. Government guidance on “putting victims first” under the ASB, Crime & Policing Act 2014 helps agencies identify and support high risk victims by providing tools to deal with antisocial individuals. In accordance with this guidance, it is best practice for landlords to complete a risk assessment to assess a resident’s vulnerability and risk of harm at the earliest opportunity following a report of ASB. The landlord failed to show at this point that it carried out a risk assessment of the case or prepared an action plan as per its ASB policy, which was not appropriate. It was particularly important for it to do so, given the resident had reported feeling scared and the landlord was aware of police involvement.
The landlord visited the neighbour on 5 and 22 July 2022 to discuss the rubbish and ASB issue. It also arranged for its contractors to remove the rubbish. This was appropriate and resolution focused. During the meeting of 22 July 2022 with the neighbour, the landlord suggested mediation. The landlord’s ASB policy says mediation will be offered if both sides are in agreement. Therefore, it was appropriate and in line with its policy to check if the neighbour agreed to mediation. Nevertheless, the landlord failed to evidence that mediation was discussed with the resident at this time, which was not appropriate and unfair to her. Early intervention is key in an attempt to stop matters escalating and to prevent further deterioration of neighbourly relationships. This is particularly relevant as the landlord’s ASB policy accepts a dispute with a neighbour “can have a serious effect on quality of life”.
On 3 August and 16 September 2022, the resident reported that further rubbish had been dumped in the communal area. She said that there “needed to be a deterrent” to stop future dumping of rubbish. The landlord spoke with the neighbour the same day and arranged for the rubbish to be removed on 17 September 2022. It could possibly have done more to investigate why the neighbour had been dumping rubbish every month for the previous 4 months. The evidence shows that reasons were given by the neighbour, but suggests no meaningful resolution had been provided, given the repeated occurrence.
The resident raised a stage 1 complaint on 12 February 2023. She said that rubbish had been left in the communal area, which was a breach of the tenancy agreement and a health and safety risk. She also said that her complaint was not being taken seriously and she wanted a permanent solution to the issue. The landlord attempted to contact the resident on 21 February 2022 without success. This was appropriate, as it is good practice to clarify the details of a complaint.
The landlord carried out an inspection of the rubbish on 6 March 2023. The case notes said that there were “black sacks well situated out of the way of the footpath”. This was a positive step in assessing the risk, as the resident had highlighted health and safety concerns. Nevertheless, its neighbourhood policy says that it is a resident’s responsibility to keep external communal areas free from toys, play equipment, furniture and other items when they are not in use. It is reasonable to consider that rubbish would be included in this, and the neighbour was not adhering to their responsibilities under the policy.
At this point, the resident had reported rubbish dumped in the communal area 8 times since June 2022. This was evidence of a reoccurring issue, and despite the landlord being in regular contact with the neighbour, the issue continued. It is clear that the resident had valid concerns for the need of a deterrent for preventing future reoccurrence. Yet, the landlord failed to evidence it considered formal action, even though its ASB policy considers rubbish dumping to be ASB and its tenancy policy says persistent ASB is a breach of tenancy conditions. While this may have been considered by the landlord to be a low–level issue, it was evidently frustrating for the resident, and the landlord should have considered all options including more formal action and/or sought advice from its legal team.
The resident remained unhappy and on 15 March 2023 escalated her complaint to stage 2, saying more rubbish had been dumped by the neighbour the previous day. Following contact from the landlord, the resident provided further details of her escalation request. She wanted to know why the neighbour did not store the rubbish in their own garden, and disagreed that the rubbish was not a trip hazard as she said she had tripped over it the previous week. On 27 April 2023 the resident reported dogs off lead in the communal area and arguing. In response the landlord said it would speak with the neighbour and suggested the resident use a noise app to obtain evidence of further incidents. This was reasonable, as the landlord would need evidence to progress matters.
During the panel meeting of 24 April 2023, which formed part of the landlord’s complaint process, the resident said she wanted the landlord to take “firmer” action. The landlord responded at stage 2 on 5 May 2023. It said it wanted to improve the relationship between the resident and the neighbour. It also said that it would visit the neighbour to better understand the challenges they were facing and outline that the neighbour should store the rubbish in their own garden. Establishing the underlying reasons for the continued dumped rubbish in the communal area is something that should have been investigated much earlier. The resident had been reporting the issue since June 2022, and it took the landlord until March 2023 to tell the neighbour to store the rubbish in their own garden. This was a simple solution that could have potentially resolved the problem without matters escalating. The landlord would have been within its rights to tell the neighbour to do so, given its policy says communal areas must be kept clear and dumping of rubbish is considered ASB.
As outlined above, it is good practice to complete an action plan with victims of ASB early on. In this case, this was not done with the resident. Instead, the evidence shows that an action plan was completed with the neighbour on 9 June 2023. While it was a good idea to document actions required of the neighbour, it was not appropriate that it took the landlord over a year from the initial report to do so. Undertaking this sooner could have provided an earlier resolution for the resident.
Despite discussing the option of mediation with the neighbour on 22 July 2022, the landlord failed to make a referral until 21 June 2023, which was 11 months later. This delay could be attributed to the failure to discuss mediation with the resident early on, and something that would have been avoided if an action plan was completed with her. It is noted that the landlord would not have been in a position to make a mediation referral until it had both parties’ agreement.
In summary, it is clear that the repeated occurrence of rubbish dumping was frustrating for the resident, who reported it 9 times since June 2022. While the landlord has shown that in the main it responded to the resident’s reports of ASB, it only addressed the incidents in isolation. There was no evidence of case reviews having been carried out which would have given the landlord a better understanding of the particulars of the case. It failed to complete an action plan with the resident, which would have managed her expectations in relation to what action it could take. Had a formal action plan been completed, with target dates, better management of the case could have been achieved. For example, this could have included an earlier referral to mediation and (as the landlord acknowledged) a “better understanding of the challenges” the neighbour was facing.
Therefore, as outlined above there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB. This Service notes that the landlord’s compensation policy says compensation will not be paid for the behaviour of other customers, for example, in relation to ASB. However, it does say that a goodwill gesture may be made if a customer has been inconvenienced due to the way the landlord has delivered a service. It is evident that the resident was inconvenienced through poor delivery of service by the landlord. Therefore, the Ombudsman considers awarding compensation appropriate in this case. The landlord’s compensation policy allows for up to £150 to be paid where there has been a high level of service failure.. As a result, the maximum amount under this category has been awarded. This is also in line with our remedies guidance where maladministration has been found and the landlord made some attempt to put things right but failed to address the detriment to the resident.

Complaint handling

The landlord’s complaints policy says it aims to acknowledge complaints at stage 1 within 5 working days and offer a response within 10 working days. At stage 2, residents can escalate their complaint to a stage 2 appeal panel and details of the outcome will be provided within 5 working days of the date of the panel meeting.
The resident requested to raise a stage 1 complaint on 12 February 2023. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 21 February 2023. This was 7 working days later, and although slightly outside of its policy timescale, it is not considered an unreasonable delay. It then provided its stage 1 response on 7 March 2023, which was 17 working days later, and another 6 days outside of its policy timescale. This was not appropriate. This Service notes that the resident had said in her stage 2 escalation request that the stage 1 response was received after 7 March 2023 as it was sent by second class post. This additional delay could have been avoided by sending the response by email, as this was the form of communication used in previous correspondence with the resident.
The resident requested to escalate her complaint to stage 2 on 15 March 2023 and the panel meeting was mutually agreed to be held on 24 April 2023. The stage 2 panel response was sent on 2 May 2023. This was 5 working days later and within the landlord’s policy timescale, and therefore appropriate.
The resident had expressed her frustration in her stage 2 escalation that the stage 1 response was delayed. The landlord did not acknowledge this in its response and also failed to offer compensation to put things right. Therefore, there was service failure by the landlord in its complaint handling. £50 compensation has been awarded to the resident, it is in line with the landlord’s compensation policy and our remedies guidance.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB including dumping of rubbish by a neighbour.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this determination, the landlord is ordered to take the following action and provide the Ombudsman with evidence of compliance:
1. Write to the resident to apologise for the failures identified in this report, in line with this Service’s apologies guidance.
2. Pay directly to the resident compensation totalling £200, made up of:
  1. £150 for the distress and inconvenience caused to her in relation to its response to her reports of ASB.
  2. £50 for the distress and inconvenience caused to her by its complaint handling failures.
3. Review its staff’s training needs regarding their application of its ASB policy, in order to ensure that the above failings do not happen again. In particular, it should highlight the need to take a victim–centred approach, and ensure risk assessments and action plans are completed, monitored, and updated regularly.
4. Contact the resident to discuss the current situation and provide the resident and this Service with an update regarding its proposed action in relation to any ongoing ASB. Should it decide no action is necessary, it should explain what considerations it made in coming to the decision.
5. Give consideration to what additional support is available to the resident, if appropriate.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord arranges for relevant frontline staff involved in complaint handing to complete this Service’s free online complaint handling courses, dispute resolution and applying dispute resolution for landlords, if this has not been done recently.