Clarion Housing Association Limited (202317755)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202317755

Clarion Housing Association Limited

26 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 anti-social behaviour (ASB) and harassment.
2. We have also considered the landlord’s handling of the associated complaints.

Background

3. The resident has shared ownership of the property with the landlord, a housing association. The property is a 2-bedroom flat. There are no vulnerabilities recorded by the landlord.
4. The resident reported ASB to the landlord in 2021. She reported incidents such as loud music, threatening messages, harassment, loud banging against her wall, and verbal abuse by the alleged perpetrator (AP), her neighbour. The landlord and the resident communicated in several emails during that year regarding her reports.
5. The landlord sent a letter to the resident on 10 May 2021 about its investigation. It also communicated with the police and other residents within the block about the reports. The landlord reviewed the case on 24 September 2021 and recommended closing it due to insufficient evidence.
6. The resident made further reports of ASB between January and February 2022. On 23 February 2022 she complained that the landlord had not provided feedback despite various evidence being sent. The landlord liaised with the police and the local council in March 2022.
7. The landlord updated the resident about its investigations on 6 April and 11 May 2022. It noted it sent a warning letter to the AP on 31 May 2022. The resident reported on 23 September 2022 that she was receiving abusive calls and messages and had reported it to the police. The landlord noted that it closed the case at the end of September 2022 due to no further reports.
8. Around 16 January 2023 the resident reported the alleged perpetrator (AP), her neighbour, had installed a ring doorbell camera specifically to monitor and harass her. She said this was a violation of the landlord’s policy. She also reported she was being stalked and harassed by the AP.
9. On 6 March 2023 the landlord instructed the AP to reposition their camera and adjust the viewing angle in line with data protection regulations. The resident also reported in March and April 2023 that she was being stalked outside the property and within the communal areas.
10. The resident made a formal complaint around 9 April 2023 that the landlord had not taken action to remove the AP’s ring doorbell camera. She said the AP continued to threaten her and asked the landlord to handle the issue.
11. The landlord responded to the complaint on 25 May 2023. It apologised for the delay in providing an update and assured her it had commenced legal action against the AP to remove the camera. It offered £100 compensation.
12. The resident expressed further dissatisfaction on 28 May 2023, and raised a stage 2 complaint on 29 May 2023. She said the landlord was not taking appropriate steps to remove the AP’s camera and should not be completely dependent on the police.
13. In its response on 19 July 2023 the landlord acknowledged that the process had been delayed and that it had not kept the resident updated. It assured her that it would start legal action against the AP and provide regular updates to her. It revised its offer of compensation to £550 for the inconvenience caused and £50 for its handling of historical ASB (unrelated).
14. The resident referred the complaint to this Service on 16 August 2023. She said the landlord failed to follow up actions agreed at the end of the complaints process.

Events after the complaints process was exhausted

15. The landlord and the police liaised in several emails between October and November 2023 about the resident’s reports of harassment.
16. The resident raised complaints around 11 September and 3 November 2023 about other issues including the removal of the AP’s camera. The landlord responded on 3 November 2023 (stage 1) and 21 February 2024 (stage 2) that it:
    1. Had reviewed the case and determined that the AP’s camera was not directed at her door and had decided not to pursue legal action (as the camera was pointing to the communal hallway).
    2. Was unable to take legal action as this did not constitute a tenancy breach and would be better pursued as an ASB case.
    3. Failed to update the resident on the steps it was taking and had only informed her of this decision in August 2023.
    4. Assured the resident that the AP had removed the camera in January 2024.
    5. Offered the resident £250 for the delay in communication and the response to her complaint.
17. The landlord worked with the police from October 2023 to investigate the resident’s complaints about harassment.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

18. It is noted that there is a long history of ASB reports by the resident (between 2020 and 2023) which she had reported to the police and the landlord. From the evidence seen the resident did not raise a complaint until 2023. Therefore, this investigation has focussed on the landlord’s handling of ASB reports from 2022 onwards, that were considered during the landlord’s complaint responses in May and July 2023.
19. This is because residents are expected to raise complaints with their landlords in a timely manner, so the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issues whilst they are still ‘live.’
20. We have also noted that the landlord responded to complaints raised by the resident between January and April 2024 about:
    1. Restricted access to its ASB team.
    2. The conduct of its staff.
    3. Her doorbell camera and why its staff had asked her to remove it.
21. The landlord responded to the complaints through its internal complaints process after it provided its stage 2 response on 19 July 2023. A separate case has been created for the investigation of these matters.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of anti-social behaviour (ASB) and harassment.

22. The landlord’s closed-circuit television (CCTV) policy states that it reserves the right to request CCTV or video doorbells are re-positioned or removed, where it receives complaints about inappropriate use that amount to harassment or ASB. If this request is not complied with, it’s policy sets out that it may apply to the courts for an injunction or take other action as deemed appropriate.
23. The landlord’s policy defines ASB as conduct that has caused, or is likely to cause, harassment, alarm, or distress to any person. Where ASB is the result of criminal activity it expects residents to report criminal behaviour to the police and expects the police and other statutory agencies to take action where they have sufficient evidence to do so. It recognises the importance of collaborating with the police and local authorities to support and encourage their role in enforcing the law.
24. From the evidence seen the resident contacted the landlord on 10 March 2022 and reported she was being harassed by the AP. This included stalking, verbal abuse, threatening messages from an unknown number, loud banging by the AP and their guests which she had also reported to the police. She said they were intentionally causing her distress. She asked the landlord not to disclose the source of the reports to the AP until the police had concluded their investigations.
25. The landlord contacted the police around the same date to request information. It received some feedback from the police that they were aware of reports from the resident and were looking into them. The landlord’s actions at this stage were appropriate and in line with its ASB policy. On 7 April 2022 the landlord said it would review video evidence provided by the resident and come back to her. She said the police advised it was within the landlord’s authority to take action against the AP.
26. The evidence suggests the landlord contacted the resident by phone on 11 May 2022 to discuss the case. It followed this up by email and advised her that it was still waiting for the police to respond to its formal information disclosure request. It assured the resident that it was still investigating the matter and would update her. This was reasonable as it kept the resident updated.
27. During June 2022 the landlord followed up the resident’s concerns about other issues such as loud music. It advised her to continue to fill in diary sheets to record any further incidents. In an email dated 6 August 2022 the resident said she did not agree with the landlord’s comments that the police were not taking any further action. It is unclear from the evidence what discussions the landlord had with the resident and whether it had heard back from the police.
28. The resident contacted the landlord on 23 September 2022 for an update. She said she continued to receive threatening messages and abusive calls which the police were investigating. She gave the landlord the crime reference number and the name of the police officer looking into the case. While the landlord made attempts to investigate the source of the threatening messages or phone calls in December 2022, we have not seen evidence that it formally updated the resident. This would have caused her some distress.
29. The resident followed up the matter in January 2023 and reported that the AP had installed a ring doorbell camera to watch her. She re-submitted the crime reference number previously given to the landlord in September 2023. To resolve the issue, the resident wanted the landlord to remove the camera. The evidence indicates the landlord contacted the AP to remove or reposition the camera in February 2023. It also warned them that continuous ASB could result in legal action against them. This was in line with its policy.
30. The landlord’s policy does not set out the timescales for assessing reports about criminal matters. However, it emphasises the importance of managing residents’ expectations so they are clear on the actions it can take. On 10 February 2023 the landlord advised the resident to report criminal behaviour to the police and provide the crime reference number. It said failure to do so may result in her case being closed. However, the resident had previously advised the landlord that she had reported the matter to the police and provided the relevant information. This would have caused her frustration.
31. The resident continued to report threatening behaviour and harassment by the AP. She said they made comments about her appearance (after viewing footage from their camera recordings), her comings and goings, and that they intended to monitor her movements. The landlord carried out several visits to the AP in March 2023. In line with its policy, it advised the AP that it would take legal action if they did not remove the ring doorbell camera by 27 March 2023. It arranged a visit on that date to see if they had complied. These actions were appropriate.
32. On 21 May 2023 the resident said the police had been trying to contact the landlord without success. While the landlord had contacted the police in 2022, we have not seen evidence that it updated the resident on the progress of the case. This was unreasonable. The landlord phoned the resident on 22 May 2023 to discuss the case. It agreed an action plan and agreed to contact the police to request information. It assured the resident she would be sent an update within 2 weeks. This shows some learning in its communication with her.
33. The landlord apologised through its stage 1 complaint on 25 May 2023. It acknowledged that the resident had been inconvenienced by having to make contact repeatedly regarding the matter. It advised the resident that it was pursuing legal action against the AP to remove the doorbell camera. It offered £50 for the inconvenience caused by the failures in communication.
34. The resident contacted the landlord by email and phone in June 2023. She said she was tired of having to request updates on the case, and that the landlord failed to contact the police. Despite the actions agreed the landlord did not contact the police until 13 July 2023. This was unreasonable. It missed several opportunities to liaise with them at the earliest opportunity regarding the case and to manage the resident’s expectations.
35. It is unclear from the evidence if the landlord followed up its contact, or if it received a response from the police. The resident continued to report concerns about the AP’s behaviour towards her. Throughout this period, she remained uncertain about what was being done, and any actions the landlord might be able to take. This is not in in line with the landlord’s policy to adopt a victim-centred approach in responding to reports of harassment and crime. It should have considered if a referral to victim support and other agencies was needed.
36. In its stage 2 response on 19 July 2023 the landlord explained that its attempts to manage the case (removal of doorbell camera) through the tenancy breach process did not work so it referred it for legal action in March 2023. It apologised that no progress had been made due to resourcing issues. The landlord acknowledged that the delay in taking further action on the case would have caused the resident significant impact as she felt her privacy was being invaded. It said it would provide updates fortnightly with progress on the matter.
37. The landlord offered the resident £550 (this included £50 for its handling of a historical issue) for the inconvenience caused due to the delay in progressing legal action to remove the camera. It advised the resident that it had an open ASB case for harassment which was being actively worked on, but that both cases were closely linked. It assured her that it would provide regular updates on the case.
38. The landlord’s apology and offer of compensation adheres to the provisions set out in its policy. It will offer amounts between £250 to £700 where it has found considerable service failure in its handling of a matter. This includes situations where the resident has had to make repeated contacts to resolve an issue or where it has not followed its published policies or procedures. The compensation offered by the landlord is appropriate.
39. Though the landlord took some steps to deal with the issues raised by the resident, she incurred time and trouble and inconvenience in requesting numerous updates for over 12 months. The landlord recognised these failings and offered redress to put things right for the resident.
40. In addition to compensation and an apology when appropriate, our remedies guidance considers what a landlord could do to reduce the likelihood of similar situations occurring for other residents. The landlord has not evidenced steps taken to prevent a reoccurrence of the failings identified to improve future service delivery. It is for this reason that we have found service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB and harassment.

The landlord’s handling of the associated complaints

41. The landlord had an interim policy in place when it dealt with the resident’s complaints. This stated that it would aim to respond to stage 1 complaints within 20 working days and stage 2 complaints within 40 working days. The landlord’s complaint policy states that it aims to provide a quality service by keeping residents informed and managing expectations.
42. The resident complained to the landlord on 9 April 2023. Its stage 1 response was sent approximately 34 working days after the resident raised the complaint. This was not in line with its complaints policy.
43. The landlord acknowledged this and offered £100 for the inconvenience caused. It learned from this as the stage 2 response was sent within the published timescales. The landlord has since updated its complaints policy and brought it in line with the timescales set out in our complaint handling.
44. However, it failed to commit to the actions agreed at the end of the complaints process. It assured the resident in the stage 2 response on 19 July 2023 that it would commence legal action against the AP without delay and provide regular updates to her.
45. The resident had to raise another complaint to follow up actions previously agreed on 19 July 2023 in its stage 2 response. This is not appropriate. We acknowledge the landlord’s offer of redress (£250 and an apology) after the complaints process. However, failure to follow up actions agreed within a reasonable timeframe amounts to service failure. An order has been made to address this.

Determination

46. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of anti-social behaviour (ASB) and harassment.
47. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the associated complaints.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

48. Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord should:
    1. Apologise to the resident in writing for the failures identified in this report.
    2. Pay the resident a total of £650 broken down as:
       1. £550 for the distress and inconvenience for its handling of the ASB reports if it has not yet been paid.
       2. £100 for the time and trouble for its handling of the complaint if it has not yet been paid.
    3. Deliver refresher training to relevant staff to:
       1. Emphasise the importance of following its policies and procedures when dealing with ASB cases, particular focus should be given to providing regular updates to residents reporting ASB.
       2. Ensure staff adhere to its complaints procedure and follow up any actions agreed in its complaint responses.
    4. Provide evidence of compliance with the above orders.

Recommendations

49. Pay the resident the £250 offered in its complaint response dated 21 February 2024.