Homes Plus Limited (202304014)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202304014

Homes Plus Limited

31 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 handling of the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB).
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident lives with her partner in a 2-bedroom house. She holds an assured tenancy agreement with her landlord, a housing association.
The resident reported issues of ASB related to her neighbour’s dog barking, vandalism of her car and her neighbours storing, selling, and parking cars incorrectly on a car park. The car park was part of the landlord’s land.
The resident raised a complaint about these issues on 11 April 2023. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 10 July 2023. It advised that it would further support the resident by arranging a neighbourhood officer to agree a plan of action, and that it would liaise and share information with the police.
The resident escalated her complaint on 11 July 2023 and the landlord issued its stage 2 response on 24 August 2023. The landlord advised that the complaint would be partially upheld, it said:
1. That a surveyor attended the car park on 17 August 2023, and it was agreed a no parking sign would be erected to try to prevent incorrect parking.
2. There was no space to install additional parking bays, and the car parking bays were not allocated to specific households.
3. The resident’s neighbour had been spoken to about storing and selling cars on the car park. This was being monitored by its Tenancy Management team.
4. CCTV would not currently be installed on the car park. However, this would be reviewed on a regular basis.
5. It had reviewed the ASB cases and its own actions. While it understood the resident’s frustrations the actions it had taken where proportionate and appropriate. An action plan had also recently been agreed on 10 August 2023 and it would continue to work with the resident to try and resolve the ASB.
6. That it would be led by the police in relation to the alleged vandalism of the resident’s mobility car by her neighbour. As the police closed their investigation due to a lack of evidence and were unable to identify the perpetrators, it could take no further action in relation to this.
After the stage 2 complaint response was issued the landlord:
1. Erected a no parking sign in September 2023.
2. Attended a community trigger meeting on 17 October 2023.
3. Installed temporary CCTV in the car park in February 2024.
4. Continued to consult with the resident and other agencies about the ASB.

Assessment and findings

Scope of Investigation

Although it is noted that there is a history of ASB reports by the resident, this investigation has focussed on the landlord’s handling of the reports from May 2022 onwards, which were considered as part of the landlord’s complaint response. This is because resident would be expected to raise complaints with their landlord in a timely manner so that the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issues whilst they are still ‘live’.
The Ombudsman also notes that the resident has raised several other complaints with the landlord about its actions after the stage 2 complaint response was issued on 24 August 2023. In the interest of fairness, this investigation will focus on the landlord’s actions up to 24 August 2023. If the resident remains unhappy with the landlord’s actions after this date, and the matters have completed the landlord’s complaint procedure the resident may refer the new issues to this Service.
In cases relating to ASB, it is not the Ombudsman’s role to determine whether ASB occurred or who is responsible. The Ombudsman can assess how a landlord has dealt with reports it has received in the timeframe of a complaint. We can assess whether the landlord has followed proper procedure, good practice, and behaved reasonably, taking account of all the circumstances of the case.

ASB

For the purposes of this report the Ombudsman will refer to the resident’s neighbours as ‘neighbour A’ and ‘neighbour B’
On 12 May 2022 the resident raised concerns that a dog was making excessive noise at neighbour A’s property. The same day the landlord contacted the resident and agreed an action plan. This included providing diary sheets to record incidents of noise and providing information on a ‘noise app’ that could be used to record the sound as it happened. Following this, on 19 May 2022 the landlord visited neighbour A and asked the neighbour to be mindful of the noise.
These initial actions by the landlord were positive. It’s ASB policy sets out that the landlord will agree an action plan, conduct a risk assessment, and take proportionate action against a perpetrator of ASB where appropriate. The steps the landlord took were in line with this policy and the action taken was prompt.
The resident reported further noise on 14 July 2022. Following this, on 21 July 2022, the landlord sent a written warning to neighbour A and updated the resident. This shows that the landlord was proactive in managing the issue and that it continued to take proportionate action in line with its ASB policy.
On 20 September 2022 the resident raised an issue that neighbour B was storing extra cars on the car park outside of the allocated spaces. That neighbour B was selling these cars as a business, and it was causing her obstruction and inconvenience. She also advised that cars were also being stored for neighbour B at neighbour A’s address and that her own car had been damaged or targeted after her earlier ASB reports to the landlord.
The landlord contacted the resident the same day to discuss these ASB concerns and arrange a meeting. Following the meeting the landlord spoke with neighbour B about the car parking issues on 5 October 2022. This shows that the landlord was working quickly to deal with the reports of ASB by the resident. It continued to follow its ASB policy by taking proportionate action such as interviewing and warning the neighbours about their actions.
Between October and November 2022, the resident and landlord were in regular communication about the ASB. This included the resident making further reports of a dog barking and issues with car parking. During this period the landlord:
1. Contacted neighbour A about the dog barking on 2 occasions before neighbour A confirmed the dog was no longer at the property.
2. Liaised with police about the car parking and alleged vandalism of the resident’s car.
3. Visited the estate with the police to review the actions it could take.
4. Agreed that the police would issue a general letter to all residents about being mindful of ASB.
These actions continued to align with the landlord’s ASB policy. The policy says that it should speak with other agencies where appropriate to agree a joint approach, and that it would regularly update the resident on the actions taken. The landlord also contacted the resident weekly in January 2023 to ensure that the ASB issues raised had been resolved. This was further evidence of the landlord’s proactive approach to managing the resident’s initial ASB concerns.
The landlord decided to close the initial ASB case on 30 January 2023 as there had been no further issues reported by the resident since December 2022. This closure was in line with its policy as the resident confirmed that the initial issues had been resolved.
On 13 March 2023 the resident raised a new concern about several tenants on the resident’s estate parking inconsiderately or outside of allocated bays. The landlord responded the following day to advise that it could not do anything about the parking issue. However, this response was not supported by the relevant tenancy agreements. The tenancy agreement set out that residents should not, among other things:
1. Park on any land owned by the landlord that was not designated for parking.
2. Park in such a way as to cause blockages and obstructions deliberately and inconsiderately to highways, drives, footpaths, pedestrian crossings, or access roads. For example, such as to allow emergency service vehicles full and timely access in the case of an emergency.
As the resident specifically told the landlord in her email to the landlord that cars were parked causing an obstruction and outside of allocated bays, this should have alerted the landlord to a potential issue. It would have been reasonable for it to consider what action would be appropriate to prevent this from reoccurring.
On 11 April 2023 the resident raised a complaint and described that she was unhappy because several different neighbours had caused obstructions by failing to park in allocated parking bays. She advised the landlord that her mental health was suffering due to this issue and that nobody was stopping this ASB. She also advised that her car had recently been vandalised due to raising these issues.
The landlord’s initial response to this further report of ASB was reasonable and aligned with its ASB policy. It contacted the resident on 19 April 2023 and recorded that she was unhappy with both the parking issue and that neighbour B was using the car park to sell cars. The landlord agreed to visit the resident with the police to discuss her concerns.
However, the evidence shows that no further action was taken in relation to this ASB, and a home visit was not made until 5 July 2023. This lack of action for 11 weeks caused the resident some significant distress at what was already a stressful time.
Between 5 July 2023 and 24 August 2023, the landlord’s actions were reasonable and in line with its ASB policy. The landlord:
1. Created an action plan for the resident.
2. Completed appropriate risk assessments.
3. Interviewed neighbour B in relation to the car parking issue.
4. Issued a verbal warning to neighbour B about selling cars in the car park.
5. Offered to arrange mediation again for the parties involved.
6. Conducted a survey of the car park to establish if additional bays or any other action could be taken to resolve the parking issues.
7. Advised that a ‘no parking sign’ would be erected in the car park to ensure more visibility for non-parking areas.
8. Liaised with police about the alleged vandalism caused by neighbour’s A and B to the resident’s vehicle. It advised the resident that it would be led by the police in respect of the allegations. However, as the police had been unable to identify the perpetrators, it could not take any action against the neighbours. However, it made clear the resident should continue to report serious matters to both the police and the landlord.
9. Said that CCTV would not be installed, but that it would keep this under review on a monthly basis.
The Ombudsman understands that ASB can have a serious impact on a resident’s enjoyment of their home. In this case, the resident was living in a stressful situation and was upset and frustrated at her neighbour’s actions. However, the Ombudsman also appreciates that ASB cases can be challenging as options available or chosen by the landlord to resolve a case may not have aligned with the resident’s preferred outcome.
The landlord did many positive things and followed its own ASB policy by taking proportionate where appropriate. However, there were 2 instances where its service failed to align with its policy and caused some distress and inconvenience. The landlord failed to initially address the car parking issue after it was reported in March 2023, and failed to take any action for 11 weeks between 19 April 2023 and 11 July 2023 after it agreed to a meeting with the resident. In addition, the landlord did not recognise these failings as part of its complaint response. When considering all the circumstances this amounts to maladministration.
These failings adversely impacted the resident, however, after the meeting in July 2023 the landlord’s actions improved. Therefore, the Ombudsman does not consider there was any permanent impact on the resident because of these failings. In circumstances such as these this Service’s remedies guidance says that a payment of between £100 to £600 would be appropriate.
It is the Ombudsman’s view that a payment of £250 would be fair to recognise the failings identified in this report. This considers both the impact on the resident, as well as the positive actions taken by the landlord following once the meeting had been held.

Complaint handling

The landlord’s complaint procedure defines a complaint as, “An expression of dissatisfaction, however made, about the standards of our service, actions or lack of action by the organisation, its own staff, or those acting on its behalf, affecting an individual or group of residents.”
The resident raised a formal complaint on 11 April 2023 via the landlord’s feedback form. She specifically labelled the feedback as a complaint and set out why she was dissatisfied with the landlord’s handling of her ASB concerns. She highlighted that in her view the landlord had failed to take action and explained how she had been impacted by the landlord’s failure to act.
The landlord responded on 17 April 2023 and advised that it was unable to consider the resident’s complaint as it considered her email to be a ‘request for service’. This decision was not in line with the definition of a complaint in its complaint policy. The decision not to investigate the resident’s complaint in April 2023 delayed the resident’s ability to bring the complaint to this Service and caused her some distress and frustration.
This Service contacted the landlord on 23 June 2023 to advise that the resident had raised a complaint, but that no response had been provided. The landlord acknowledged this within 5 working days and provided a response to the resident at stage 1 of its procedure within 10 working days. This was in line with its complaint procedure timescales.
The landlord’s complaint procedure says that a stage 2 complaint should be responded to within 20 workings days and where this is not possible any extension should be no more than 10 working days.
The resident escalated the complaint on 11 July 2023. This was acknowledged by the landlord on 12 July 2023, and on 8 August 2023 the landlord advised that it would require additional time to complete the stage 2 process. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response was issued on 24 August 2023. This response was provided 2 working days outside of the timescales set out in its complaint procedure. This short delay increased the distress felt by the resident.
Taking all the circumstances into account, the landlord’s actions amount to maladministration. It failed to correctly identify that the resident had raised a complaint about its service, and this meant the time taken to issue its stage 1 response was unreasonable. Following this, the landlord failed to deal with the stage 2 complaint response within its policy timescales.
As set out earlier in this report where the resident has been adversely impacted by the landlord’s actions a payment of between £100 to £600 would be appropriate. Therefore, the Ombudsman considers a payment of £200 is fair to acknowledge the impact on the resident.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s:
1. Reports of ASB.
2. Associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
1. Provide a written apology to the resident for the failings identified.
2. Pay £450 compensation to the resident, broken down as:
  1. £250 for the ASB handling.
  2. £200 for the handling of the associated complaint.
3. Review whether it should offer training for its staff overseeing formal complaints, particularly in relation to identifying what is or is not a complaint as defined under its policy. It is ordered to provide evidence of the review to this Service.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the landlord consider contacting the resident in writing to discuss any outstanding complaint issues she may have.