Incommunities Limited (202224566)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202224566

Incommunities Limited

20 June 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 response to the resident’s concerns about the removal of a hedge from his neighbour’s garden.

Background

2. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord. The property is a 1-bedroom bungalow. The landlord has recorded vulnerabilities for the resident including, paranoid psychosis, agoraphobia, anxiety, depression, OCD, and fibromyalgia.
3. The building adjacent to the resident’s neighbour is a public house. The neighbour referred to in this report is also a tenant of the landlord. On 13 January 2023, the resident complained to the landlord that it was in the process of removing a hedge between his neighbour’s house and the public house. He wanted the landlord to stop any further work because the hedge provided privacy.
4. On 16 January 2023, the landlord provided its stage 1 complaint response. It did not uphold the complaint. It said that it had inspected the hedge and noted that it was too high to maintain at 7 feet. Its policy was to reduce hedges to a maintainable height of 4 feet. If it reduced the hedge to 4 feet, it would slowly die off. His neighbour was happy for the hedge to be removed as it provided a better view, and the decision was made to remove the hedge.
5. On 25 January 2023, the resident escalated his complaint. He said that the removal of the hedge would allow unwanted attention from the public house, make him feel intimidated, and affect the enjoyment of his home. He also said that the landlord did not provide a reason for removing it, highlighting that the hedge had been in place for years. As a resolution to the complaint, he wanted a 6-foot fence erected on his property to provide privacy.
6. On 22 February 2022, the landlord provided its stage 2 complaint response. It did not uphold the complaint. It confirmed that it had removed the hedge within his neighbour’s boundary, based on a request from his neighbour. It said it had no requirement to consult with other residents before removing the hedge. It accepted that the removal of the hedge changed the resident’s view of the public house, however, it did not agree that it impacted on the resident’s privacy. It did not agree to provide a higher fence to the resident. 
7. When the resident brought his complaint to this Service, he remained unhappy that the hedge had been removed. He said that people visiting the public house would have a direct view of his garden. He suffers from anxiety and paranoid feelings and the lack of privacy would affect the enjoyment of his home. As a resolution to the complaint, the resident wants the landlord to erect a higher fence to provide privacy.  

Assessment and findings

8. The landlords guide to grounds maintenance and environmental works sets out its guidance on maintaining hedges. It states that “if a hedge is over 5 feet high it would normally be reduced to 5 feet in order for it to be maintained safely for health and safety reasons.” The resident’s tenancy agreement sets out that the landlord is responsible for keeping in good repair the structure and exterior of his home including fencing and gates.
9. It is unclear which policy the landlord refers to in its complaint response when it stated that hedges should be maintained at 4 feet. While the guidance states it would maintain hedges to 5 feet, it also highlights that the document is for guidance only and maintenance work may vary. This Service considers that it was reasonable for the landlord to determine how best to maintain the hedge on his neighbour’s property and it acted within its own guidance. In its complaint response, it provided the resident with a valid reason for removing the hedge, highlighting that the hedge was within his neighbour’s boundary, and it had removed it with his neighbour’s consent.  
10. The landlord’s obligations in the tenancy agreement are to maintain fencing and gates on the property. There is no obligation to improve the fencing for the resident’s privacy. The landlord’s complaint response shows that it considered the resident’s request for a higher fence, however, it did not agree that his privacy had been affected. This was an appropriate response by the landlord.
11. While this Service empathises with the resident’s concerns for his privacy, and the fact that the hedge had been in place for a significant length of time, the landlord’s response was reasonable, and it acted within its own guidance.
12. This Service finds that there was no maladministration by the landlord with its response to the resident’s concerns about the removal of a hedge from his neighbour’s garden. This is because it provided the resident with a valid reason for the removal of the hedge, it acted reasonably within its own guidance, and it considered the resident’s request for a new fence.  

Determination

13. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration with the landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about the removal of a hedge from his neighbour’s garden.