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

Citizen Housing Group Limited (202302148)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202302148

Citizen Housing

27 May 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 anti-social behaviour (ASB).
  2. We have also investigated the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

  1. The resident was an assured tenant of the landlord, a housing association. The property is a 2-bedroom flat. The resident lived at the property with her partner and her young child. She moved out from the property in June 2023. The resident has anxiety. For the purpose of this investigation, we have referred to the neighbours involved in the resident’s reports of ASB as neighbour X, Y, and Z, respectively.
  2. On 20 November 2022 the resident recorded a conversation between neighbour X and neighbour Y. She reported this to the landlord the following day and said neighbour X used a racial slur about her partner, and she felt threatened by them. She also said this conversation was overhead by her young child. She spoke to the police about this on this date. The next day she sent evidence to landlord, and it arranged for a home visit on 23 November 2022. The landlord opened an ASB case about her neighbours on 24 November 2022 and spoke to the neighbours on 25 November 2022.
  3. The resident provided ASB evidence to the landlord on 15 December 2022 about her neighbours. The resident then sent evidence on 19 December 2022 about an incident on 18 December 2022 involving her neighbours ringing her doorbell. The landlord also received contact from the police on 13 January 2023. The landlord then sent a tenancy warning letter to neighbour X dated 17 January 2023. On 18 January 2023 she told the landlord she had not experienced further ASB from neighbour X.
  4. On 16 February 2023 the resident contacted the landlord about ASB. She sent evidence and told it that neighbour Z swore at her and accused her of damaging items. She also mentioned she was in the process of receiving banding from a housing trust and queried if it could assist her. On 21 February 2023 she interacted with neighbour Y, then on 22 February 2023 sent the landlord evidence of this interaction and reported it as ASB. On 23 February 2023 the landlord entered into a non-legal enforcement contract with neighbour X.
  5. The landlord spoke to the resident on 1 March 2023 and referred to her complaint that she had submitted on its online portal. The landlord told the resident:
    1. It would look at her emergency transfer request.
    2. That the evidence provided on 22 February 2023 did not show it was instigated by neighbour Y. It explained its position to not take further action.
  6. On 7 March 2023 the landlord closed the resident’s ASB case. The resident then spoke to the landlord on 11 April 2023. The landlord informed her that she did not qualify for an emergency transfer which is only considered when there are serious threats of violence. The landlord sent this in writing on 12 April 2023. On the same day, the resident’s doctor issued a letter. This said the resident had anxiety and that she was stressed because of the abusive and racist behaviour of her neighbours. The resident contacted us about her complaint on 14 April 2023 and said the landlord had not taken action.
  7. The resident reported further ASB to the landlord on 2 May 2023 from her neighbours. On 4 May 2023 the landlord said it did not consider the reported behaviour to be ASB. The landlord also said it could refer her to its team for further support after it had received her doctor’s letter.
  8. On 23 August 2023 the resident submitted a formal complaint to the landlord. She told the landlord:
    1. She was dissatisfied with the landlord’s handling of her ASB reports.
    2. She had moved from the property due to the racial abuse and harassment she and her family experienced. She said there was a lack of help provided by the landlord.
  9. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint on 23 August 2023 and sent its stage 1 complaint response on 7 September 2023. The landlord:
    1. Acknowledged that it was a distressing time for the resident but on occasions it had limited powers to take further action.
    2. Said it had followed its ASB policies by:
      1. Completing a risk assessment.
      2. Putting in place an ASB action plan.
      3. Contacting other professionals.
      4. Conducting home visits to discuss issues the with the neighbours.
      5. Regular contact by its team.
      6. Working alongside police.
    3. Said at the time, the resident did not meet the criteria for an emergency transfer. This was only considered for cases where serious threats of violence or safety had occurred and as a result be unsafe for her to remain living there. This would need to be confirmed by the police.
  10. The resident escalated her complaint on 7 September 2023 as she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response on 3 October 2023. The landlord said:
    1. It had followed its policies and carried out a full investigation.
    2. No further emergency transfer application was received after it had informed her that she did not meet the threshold in April 2023. It apologised that she felt she had to move from the property.
    3. It empathised with the resident for the impact the issues had on her and her family. 
    4. It would use its discretion to offer £150 in compensation for the distress she experienced because of the ASB.
  11. On 9 November 2023 the resident asked us to investigate her complaint as she remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response. She wanted more compensation and said the experience impacted on her family’s mental and physical health.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. It is not our role to establish whether the ASB reported by the resident has taken place or not. Our role is to establish whether the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of ASB was in line with its legal and policy obligations. Including whether its response was fair in all the circumstances of the case.
  2. Further, the resident told us her and her partner’s health and wellbeing had been affected. We are unable to draw conclusions on the causation of, or liability for, effects on health and wellbeing. Therefore, we cannot make a determination about the effect of the landlord’s actions or inaction on the resident’s health. The resident may wish to seek independent advice if she wishes to pursue this aspect of her complaint.
  3. However, we have considered any general distress and inconvenience caused by the landlord’s actions or inactions.

Reports of ASB

  1. The landlord’s ASB and hate crime policy says it will look to intervene early to resolve issues. This may include using:
    1. Mediation.
    2. Restorative justice.
    3. Warning letters.
    4. Acceptable behaviour contracts (ABC).
    5. Parenting contracts. 
  2. Prior to opening ASB cases, the landlord operates an ‘evidence triage stage’. It also operates an ‘overarching ASB process’ for open ASB cases.
  3. After the resident’s report of ASB on 21 November 2022, the landlord requested evidence in line with its ASB evidence triage process. The resident provided information on 22 November 2022, and a home visit was arranged for 23 November 2022 as the landlord could not hear the recording provided by her. This was reasonable action by the landlord. Once it had obtained the evidence on 23 November 2022 it appropriately opened an ASB case. It also knew that she had reported the hate crime to the police. However, at that stage, it was reasonable it signposted her to the local council’s hate crime online service as well.
  4. On 24 November 2022 the landlord completed a ‘vulnerability assessment matrix’ (VAM) for the resident. This was completed by the landlord inside the 1-working day timescale in its ASB process for hate crime. This was an appropriate action for it to take.
  5. The landlord’s ASB process says that it will contact the resident and contact the neighbours. The evidence shows after the landlord contacted the resident to discuss the ASB, it made an action plan. This was signed by the resident on 25 November 2022. On the same day, the landlord also spoke with the neighbours and told them to not contact the resident. The landlord had followed its ASB process, therefore this was appropriate action by the landlord.
  6. The resident reported to the landlord further contact and ASB from the neighbours on 15 and 19 December 2022. After the landlord was contacted by the police on 13 January 2023, it sent neighbour X a tenancy warning letter on 17 January 2023. This was in line with its ASB and hate crime policy. It was also reasonable it informed the resident of this on 18 January 2023, as it showed it was resolution focused.
  7. The landlord also demonstrated it was taking the resident’s concerns seriously, as it had entered an acceptable behaviour contract with neighbour X on 23 February 2023. This was appropriate and the landlord was using its non-legal enforcement as set out in its ASB and hate crime policy.
  8. The resident made another report of ASB which concerned neighbour Z. The resident provided evidence to the landlord on 16 February 2023. The landlord appropriately spoke to neighbour Z on the same day and told them they had breached their tenancy, as well as neighbour Y’s tenancy. As the landlord intervened promptly, this was in line with its ASB and hate crime policy.
  9. On 22 February 2023 the resident reported an incident she said she experienced the day before, which involved neighbour Y. The landlord explained its position as to why it would not take further action on 1 March 2023. This was a reasonable response by it.
  10. In the same call of 1 March 2023, the resident told the landlord she wanted it to give her an emergency transfer. The evidence shows the landlord was considering her request in line with its tenancy and licence management policy. On 11 April 2023 it explained to her why it would not agree to this. We have not been provided with any contrasting evidence which shows the landlord failed to appropriately consider an emergency transfer. We have therefore not seen any evidence that the landlord’s reasons for declining her request was not in line with its tenancy and licence management policy. Although the VAM scored the resident in the ‘high’ category, the VAM does not state it would facilitate an emergency move for the resident. Therefore, the landlord was not obligated to provide an emergency transfer to the resident at that stage.
  11. Although the landlord rejected an emergency transfer, we have seen evidence it did provide support to the resident. The landlord contacted a local housing trust on 10 February 2023 about her circumstances at the time and her potential application for a new property.
  12. After the resident’s ASB case was closed by the landlord, it received a new report of ASB from her on 2 May 2023. This concerned neighbour X and neighbour Y. The landlord responded on 4 May 2023 saying it had reviewed the footage and why it did not consider this was ASB. This was appropriate action by the landlord, as it followed its ASB evidence triage process and promptly provided its position.
  13. In the landlord’s response of 4 May 2023 it also demonstrated it had considered an escalation of risk after receiving her doctor’s letter stating her health and wellbeing was being impacted by the issues. It appropriately offered to refer the resident to its team for further support. There is no evidence the resident agreed to do this.
  14. In summary, while we acknowledge the resident’s dissatisfaction with the landlord’s handling of her concerns, the evidence shows the landlord followed its policies and procedures. The landlord also confirmed this to the resident in its final response. Despite this, the landlord offered £150 in compensation to the resident as it empathised the effects the ASB events had on her. It was reasonable for the landlord to use its discretion in this regard. It also showed a willingness to repair its relationship with the resident, despite it identifying no service failures.
  15. Overall, we cannot conclude that the landlord has not followed its obligations, policies and procedures. The evidence shows the landlord has used its discretion and acted reasonably in the circumstances of the complaint. Considering this, we find no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB. As such, no orders have been made. A recommendation for the landlord to re-offer the £150 compensation originally made on 3 October 2023 has been suggested.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord’s complaints policy says that it considers complaints as an expression of dissatisfaction, however made. When a complaint is made, it would log the complaint at stage 1 of its internal complaints procedure and acknowledge this in 5 working days. A response at stage 1 is sent in 10 working days, but extensions can be agreed. A response at stage 2 is provided in 20 working days after a resident’s escalation.
  2. We have seen evidence the resident tried to complain earlier than when the landlord accepted it. In the phone call of 1 March 2023 the landlord documented that the resident was trying to complain about its handling of ASB via its customer portal. Despite the landlord being aware the resident wanted to complain, it did not follow its complaints policy at that stage. This was inappropriate action by the landlord. It should have acknowledged her complaint by 8 March 2023.
  3. It was not until 23 August 2023 that the landlord acknowledged the resident’s complaint at stage 1 of its internal complaints procedure. This was after the resident reiterated her complaint on the same day and had got in touch with us. It is clear the resident experienced time and trouble in chasing for the landlord to accept her complaint, which was delayed by more than 5 months. This delay was not acknowledged by the landlord during its internal complaints procedure, which was inappropriate.
  4. The timelines of the landlord’s responses at stage 1 and stage 2 were inside the 10-day and 20-day timescale in its complaints policy. No further complaint handling failings have been identified.
  5. As the landlord had not acknowledged any its complaint handling error, we have found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the complaint. In order to put things right for the resident, we have considered our guidance on remedies. The guidance on remedies considers the length of the time the resident experienced detriment, this includes time and trouble expended by her.
  6. The resident experienced delays in excess of 5 months throughout her complaint journey. She had to submit her complaint again due to a lack of action by the landlord. Our remedies guidance suggests a payment of £100 is reflective of these failings, as there was a significant delay. Orders have been made to apologise to the resident for its complaint handling, and compensate her £100 for the delays, as well as time and trouble. No further orders have been made regarding the landlord’s complaint handling as the Ombudsman’s Complaint Handling Code is now statutory.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s complaint handling.

Orders and recommendation

Orders

  1. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord must:
    1. Apologise to the resident for its complaint handling delays as identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident £100 for the delay in accepting her complaint and the time and trouble she expended chasing this.
  2. The landlord must provide evidence of compliance with the above orders to us.

Recommendation

  1. The landlord is recommended to re-offer the resident £150 in compensation as stated in its final response of 3 October 2023, if not paid already.