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

Incommunities Limited (202310528)

Back to Top

A blue and grey text AI-generated content may be incorrect.

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202310528

Incommunities Limited

18 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 noise nuisance.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of a 1-bedroom ground floor flat with his wife.
  2. Between 2016 and 2021 the landlord investigated anti-social behaviour (ASB) incidents reported by the resident. The resident said that the neighbour directly about his flat was making excessive banging noises. The landlord investigated them, but decided the noises did not amount to ASB.
  3. On 5 May 2022 the resident reported noise nuisance incidents. The landlord interviewed the resident and interviewed the neighbour. A mediation meeting was held with both parties on 24 June 2022. They agreed to be more considerate of each other and the ASB case was closed on 24 August 2022.
  4. The resident reported further noise incidents to the landlord on 6 November 2022. After its investigation the landlord informed the resident on 17 April 2023 that the ASB case was closed.
  5. The resident made a complaint to the landlord on 19 April 2023. The landlord sent a stage 1 complaint response on 28 April 2023. It said it had taken action to investigate the incidents previously and there was no evidence of unacceptable levels of noise.
  6. On 3 May 2023 the resident escalated his complaint. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response on 6 June 2023. It said it had investigated the matters he raised, but it had not found that the noise level breached the neighbour’s tenancy agreement.
  7. The resident contacted the Ombudsman on 6 July 2023 and said he was not happy with the landlord’s complaint response.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. It is the Ombudsman’s role to assess the appropriateness and adequacy of the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of ASB and the reasonableness of its responses to the formal complaint. This does not include establishing whether a neighbour was responsible for ASB. The investigation is limited to the consideration of the actions of the landlord in the context of its relevant policies and procedures, as well as what was fair in all the circumstances. The Ombudsman cannot tell the landlord to take action against the neighbour.
  2. The landlord’s records show that the resident reported noise nuisance incidents from the neighbour in the flat above to the landlord since 2016. The Ombudsman encourages residents to raise complaints with their landlord in a timely manner. This is so the landlord has a reasonable opportunity to consider the issues while they are still ‘live’, and while the evidence is available to reach an informed conclusion on the events which occurred. As the substantive issues become historical it is increasingly difficult for either the landlord, or an independent body such as the Ombudsman, to conduct an effective review of the actions taken to address those issues. In this case, the landlord provided limited records from before 2022, but it referred to the events relating to the earlier ASB reports in its responses to the resident’s complaints, so they are included in this investigation report to give context to the matters raised.

The landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of noise nuisance.

  1. The landlord’s ASB policy defines it as “conduct capable of causing nuisance or annoyance to any person”, in line with the Antisocial Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014. The policy summarises the landlord’s approach to managing ASB which includes “support and prevention”, “enforcement tools”, “support for victims and witnesses” and “partnership working”. It says that when ASB is reported it will do a fair investigation, listening to what each person has to say. It also says it will carry out a risk assessment to understand the level of potential harm to customers. 
  2. The landlord’s tenancy agreement states tenants “should keep noise to a minimum between the hours of 11pm and 7.30am”. It defines “banging on walls or ceilings” as nuisance.
  3. The landlord’s records show that it first investigated the resident’s reports of noise nuisance by his neighbour from the flat above in December 2016. It said that the resident and his neighbour took part in mediation in 2017, and the ASB case was closed in January 2018. Further noise incidents were reported by the resident in May 2020. The landlord recorded that the local authority’s environmental health department installed noise recording equipment in both properties in January 2021. The landlord closed the case in June 2021 as environmental health said it had only recorded everyday noise, and there was no evidence of noise nuisance or ASB.
  4. On 5 May 2022 the resident reported to the landlord that the neighbour had been causing noise nuisance. The landlord attended the resident’s property and interviewed him on 10 May 2022. That was in line with its ASB policy which stated it would contact the resident within 5 working days to take details of the complaint. The resident said that the noise incidents had been happening nearly every day for 7 years. He said it was normally chairs banging on the laminate floor in the neighbour’s kitchen. He also said the noises stopped when environmental health investigated the matter in 2021, and the neighbour knew they were being recorded.
  5. The resident provided diary sheets of incidents and noise recordings from his mobile phone. He said the matter caused him and his wife upset and distress, and it affected their health and sleep. He said he did not want mediation with the neighbour again, but he did want the landlord to approach the neighbour about the matter. The landlord told the resident to keep a noise diary. It also asked him to record noises using the noise app on his phone. The landlord did not complete an ASB risk assessment, which was not in line with its ASB policy.
  6. On 13 May 2022 the landlord wrote to the neighbour. It said it had received reports of ASB through excessive and repetitive banging. The landlord visited the neighbour on 17 May 2022. They denied making noises other than everyday household noise. The landlord recorded that the living room was carpeted and there were no chairs in the kitchen. The landlord wrote to the resident the following day. It said that it had visited the neighbour, and it was confident that the resident would not experience further noise nuisance. It said that the flats were not sound proofed, and it was to be expected that the neighbours would hear each other. It told the resident to send it recordings of any further instances of noise.
  7. The resident sent messages to the landlord on 24 May 2022. He said that the neighbour continued to make banging noises. He told it that he had made recordings, but they could not be heard properly from phone recordings. The landlord visited the resident on 9 June 2022. It recorded that the noises on the recordings did not meet the requirements to be considered excessive domestic noise or ASB.
  8. The landlord held a mediation meeting with the resident and the neighbour on 24 June 2022. Its records say that they both agreed that the resident would speak to the neighbour if they heard noises. The landlord held a review meeting with the resident on 24 August 2022. He agreed that the noise was 85% better, so the landlord closed the ASB case.
  9. On 6 November 2022 the resident reported a noise nuisance incident to the landlord. It opened a new ASB case. However, the landlord has told this Service that it treated it as a continuation of the previous ASB case, even though it was closed. The landlord called the resident to discuss it on 16 November 2022. That was outside of its 5 working day standard policy. He said he wanted environmental health to install noise recording equipment again. The resident told him to contact environmental health about his request. The landlord did not complete an ASB risk assessment.
  10. The landlord wrote to the resident on 12 December 2022. It said it had previously investigated his reports of noise nuisance, but it decided that the noises were consistent with appropriate levels. It said it could not take any further action at that time. The landlord called the resident on 21 December 2022. He said the noise incidents were still happening. He said he had contacted environmental health, but they told him they would not install noise recording equipment again. The landlord said it would contact environmental health to follow up the resident’s request. It is unclear when the landlord contacted environmental health, although it asked them for an update on the query on 9 January 2023.
  11. The resident reported further noise incidents to the landlord on 16 January 2023. The landlord wrote to the resident on that day. It said it had received noise diary logs from him. The copies of the logs the landlord has provided to this Service showed numerous incidents documented by the resident on 16, 17 and 18 December 2022, which were mainly banging from the neighbour’s kitchen. It referred to its letter of 12 December 2022 and again said it could not take action. The resident sent a message to the landlord on 20 January 2023. He said there had been further noise incidents, but phone recordings did not reflect how loud the banging was. The landlord replied the same day. It said it could not take action on the noises from the recordings. It said it was waiting for environmental health to confirm if it would investigate his concerns.
  12. The landlord recorded on 2 March 2023 that environmental health had told it that it would not install a recording device as they had done so before and it only picked up everyday noise. It is not clear if the landlord passed on this information to the resident.
  13. On 17 March 2023 the landlord visited the resident. It asked him to make further recordings of the noises he was complaining about. The landlord wrote to the resident on 17 April 2023. It said he had not sent any new noise recordings. It also said it did not hear any banging noises when it had visited his property. It reiterated that previous investigations with environmental health had concluded the noises were consistent with appropriate noise levels and did not constitute a tenancy breach. The landlord said it may only respond to further reports of noise nuisance if the resident provided recordings of different noises to those sent previously.
  14. The resident complained to the landlord on 19 April 2023. He said he was not happy that several different officers had dealt with the investigations into his reports of noise nuisance. He said it told him to use the noise app, but it didn’t capture the random bangs as they were hard to record. He asked that it give him further support to try and resolve the issue. The landlord acknowledged the complaint on 19 April 2023.
  15. On 28 April 2023 the landlord sent its response at stage 1 of its complaints process to the resident. It said it had explained in previous communications that it had investigated the reports of noise nuisance in a reasonable manner. It said its response to his reports was based on the evidence available. It added that it had conducted mediation sessions with the neighbour, and it was disappointing to hear he had reported further issues with noise nuisance.
  16. The landlord agreed that the noise app was not necessarily the ideal tool to record sporadic instances of noise, such as bangs. It said it had previously worked with environmental health in 2021 to install specialist noise monitoring equipment, but there was no evidence of persistent unacceptable levels of noise. It said it could not take action against the neighbour for breaching their tenancy without evidence they were doing so. It said it was satisfied that whilst he had experienced some domestic noise, it was not at the level where it could reasonably pursue enforcement action against the neighbour. The landlord offered to arrange further mediation sessions if the resident believed the relations with the neighbour had declined.
  17. The landlord’s complaint response gave details of the action it had taken to investigate the resident’s reports of noise nuisance, and why it could not take action against the neighbour. The landlord also offered to arrange further mediation between the parties. The landlord’s response addressed the matters raised by the resident and was reasonable. 
  18. On 3 May 2023 the resident told the landlord he wanted it to review his complaint. He said the landlord kept closing the ASB cases without considering all of the evidence. The landlord sent a stage 2 complaint acknowledgement to the resident on 5 May 2023.
  19. The landlord spoke to the resident about his complaint on 1 June 2023. He said he felt each time a new officer looked at his ASB cases, they closed them without fully investigated everything. He said he had provided diary logs and recordings when the noises happened, but no action was taken. He had said the diary logs showed continuous banging, which was not everyday noise.
  20. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 6 June 2023. It said that it had investigated 4 separate reports of noise nuisance between December 2016 and April 2023. It said that several different officers had dealt with the noise reports, which it appreciated would be frustrating. It added though that it could find no evidence the cases had been closed without being investigated.
  21. The landlord said that the latest case was closed in April 2023 due to a lack of evidence proving the noises were ASB. It said that there was extensive involvement and investigations into the noise reports, but it was unable to prove they were more than domestic noise. It said it had reviewed his noise diary logs, but it was unable to prove there had been incidents of noise nuisance.
  22. The landlord said that environmental health’s previous investigation only recorded what it classed as everyday noise, so they decided not to install noise recording equipment again. It said that if he provided noise recordings, they would need to show constant and persistent noise for it to consider the recordings to amount to ASB. The landlord said it had previously held mediation meetings with the resident and the neighbour, and both parties had agreed to be more considerate of each other. It told him to contact it if he wanted to try mediation again.
  23. The landlord acknowledged the resident’s frustrations of a long-standing matter and said it was sympathetic to his circumstances. It said for it to take any formal action, it had to prove the level of noise breached the neighbour’s tenancy agreement.
  24. The landlord’s stage 2 complaint response provided details of the actions it had taken over several years to investigate the reports of noise nuisance. It also offered to arrange mediation again to try and help the resident’s relationship with the neighbour. The landlord responded appropriately to the matters raised by the resident and its stage 2 reply was reasonable.
  25. The resident contacted this Service on 6 July 2023 as he was unhappy with the landlord’s response to his complaint.
  26. The resident reported further noise incidents to the landlord on 22 November 2023 and 14 May 2024. On both occasions the landlord interviewed the resident and completed ASB risk assessments. After investigating the reports, the landlord concluded that the noises were everyday noise, and it closed the cases.
  27. In summary, the evidence shows the landlord took a proactive approach to investigating the resident’s reports of noise nuisance over several years. It interviewed both the resident and the neighbour, and it conducted mediation meetings between them, which led to less noise according to the resident. It also reviewed the resident’s recordings and diary logs, and contacted environmental health to see if they would install noise recording equipment on a second occasion.
  28. Although the landlord did not rigorously follow its ASB policy by completing risk assessments or contacting the resident within its standard timescale, there is no evidence that this affected the outcome of the landlord’s investigations, or that by failing to do so caused a detriment to the resident. The evidence shows the landlord considered the evidence available to it when investigating the noise reports, and it concluded that they did not amount to ASB. The landlord explained its decisions in its correspondence and complaint responses, and it offered to arrange further mediation in an attempt to resolve the issues between the neighbours.
  29. The Ombudsman is satisfied that the landlord took appropriate action during its investigations and has determined there was no maladministration by the landlord in respect of its handling of the resident’s reports of noise nuisance.
  30. The Ombudsman recognises that the resident has reported that noises have continued after he brought his complaint to this Service, but the landlord again concluded that it was everyday noise. Due to the ongoing nature of the matters being raised, the Ombudsman has made a recommendation below for the landlord to review the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Noise Complaints (October 2022). This is with a view to consider whether a holistic approach to resolving issues caused through noise transference may be an option to explore to provide resolution in cases where noise is not considered to amount to ASB, but nevertheless causes distress to residents.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of the resident’s reports of noise nuisance.

Recommendation

  1. The landlord should review the Ombudsman’s Spotlight Report on Noise Complaints (October 2022), alongside its current ASB policy. It is recommended that the landlord adopt a preventative approach to noise transference and incorporate the recommendations of the report into its measures to prevent as well as resolve cases where noise transference is a factor. The landlord is requested to respond with its considerations to this recommendation within 4 weeks.