Incommunities Limited (202311083)
REPORT
COMPLAINT 202311083
Incommunities Limited
21 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
- The complaint is about the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of noise nuisance and antisocial behaviour (ASB).
Background
- The resident has an assured shorthold tenancy at the property, which is a one-bedroom ground floor flat. She has a support worker.
- The resident made a complaint on 3 April 2023. She said she was unhappy with how the landlord had dealt with her reports of noise from her upstairs neighbour. Within its stage 1 response it explained that without evidence it could not take action. It explained how she could evidence her reports. It said it would refer the resident and her neighbour for mediation.
- She made a further complaint on 9 June 2023. She said the neighbour had been littering and was subjecting her to “constant harassment verbal abuse and intimidation”.
- The landlord responded to this complaint at stage 1 on 23 June 2023. It explained that it had visited the property and had heard everyday noise such as footsteps. This would not be classed as ASB. It asked the resident to record incidents via the Noise App and incident diary.
- The resident escalated her complaint on 27 June 2023 and said that the landlord should provide noise reducing floorboards.
- The landlord responded at stage 2 on 27 July 2023. It repeated that she had not provided any evidence of the noises reported. It noted that she had reported the neighbour as being aggressive, which it had not responded to in line with its ASB policy. It apologised, opened an ASB case for this and offered £150 compensation.
- The resident then complained to the Ombudsman about the landlord’s response to her reports of ASB from her neighbour. This included noise nuisance, littering communal areas, and threatening and intimidating behaviour. The resident complained the landlord did not act as a neutral third party by siding with the neighbour, and that their ASB and deliberate noise while she was sleeping was still ongoing. She said this affected her health, sleep, and eating habits but that it would not insulate her block’s floors against noise, which she asked to be resolved.
Assessment and findings
Scope of investigation
- Within her communication, the resident said that the situation had harmed her health. The courts are the most effective place for disputes about personal injury and illness. This is largely because independent medical experts are appointed to give evidence. They have a duty to the court to provide unbiased insights on the diagnosis, prognosis, and the cause of any illness or injury. When disputes arise over the cause of any such injury, testimony can be examined in court. Therefore, it is quicker, fairer, more reasonable, and more effective for the resident to seek a remedy to this through the courts, which we may not consider because we do not have the authority or expertise to do so. While we cannot consider the effect of the landlord’s actions or inactions on health, consideration has been given to any general distress and inconvenience which the resident experienced as a result.
Response to the residents reports of noise nuisance and ASB
- It is clear that the ongoing nature of the situation has been distressing for the resident. It is our role to assess the appropriateness and adequacy of the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports and the reasonableness of its response to the report. This does not include establishing whether the neighbour was responsible for noise nuisance or ASB. The investigation is limited to considering the actions of the landlord in line with its policies and procedures and what was fair in all the circumstances. We cannot tell the landlord to take action against a neighbour.
- The landlord’s ASB policy, in force at the time of the resident’s complaint, says that living noises, such as walking on flooring and banging doors would not be classed as ASB. Harassment and verbal abuse would be ASB.
- If ASB is reported, the landlord will respond in a way that is appropriate and proportionate to the seriousness of the behaviour. It will try to resolve problems at an early stage by offering mediation. It can give a warning to a perpetrator but there must be evidence of unreasonable behaviour before doing so.
- For ASB reports, the landlord will:
- Acknowledge within 24 hours.
- Contact the complainant within 5 working days.
- Investigate within 15 working days.
- Take action within a further 5 working days.
- It will review ASB reports at least every 15 working days and will contact the complainant during that time.
- The Ombudsman published a spotlight report on noise complaints in October 2022 (around the time of the first report in this case). This recognised that noise can negatively affect a resident’s mental health and wellbeing. It can also be difficult for landlords to resolve. It can be helpful to take a proactive approach to noise transference. Responding to noise reports via an ASB procedure may not always be appropriate.
- The resident reported noise from her neighbour to the landlord on 20 October 2022 via her support worker. The landlord gave her details of the Noise App, including how to install it. In line with its policy, it said that, unless it had evidence of the noise, it could not take action.
- The resident next reported noise from her neighbour on 1 February 2023. The landlord contacted her in a timely manner on 3 February 2023 to discuss the issues. It encouraged her to provide evidence of noise via the Noise App so that it could hear the volume and type of noise.
- The resident asked the landlord to visit the property, which it did on 8 March 2023. This was appropriate and demonstrated that it had taken her reports seriously and sought to hear the noises reported itself. It heard footsteps but noted that these were not extreme and did not seem deliberate. It advised that, as per its policy, this would not be classed as ASB.
- The resident said there was an issue with the floorboards. The landlord confirmed that the floors were concrete and complied with building regulations.
- The resident reported again on 16 March 2023 that her neighbour was walking loudly. The landlord asked her to use the Noise App so it could review the noise. She did not provide this to the landlord.
- The resident reported (on 29 March 2023) “malicious stomping and banging”. She said the noise could not be picked up on a recording and asked for the landlord to attend.
- On 3 April 2023, the resident made a complaint. She said she was unhappy with how the ASB had been dealt with. She felt that the Neighbourhood Officer was “taking sides” and requested a new officer.
- The landlord responded at stage 1 on 3 May 2023 and said:
- The Neighbourhood Officer had spoken to the resident on 3 April 2023. Due to a lack of dates, times, and evidence of noise, it had not been able to take the reports further.
- It encouraged her to use the Noise App and offered to help set this up.
- A photograph of the garden she had provided did not show rubbish as reported.
- It could not allocate a different Neighbourhood Officer.
- It would make a referral for mediation between the resident and the neighbour. It would not escalate ASB reports, or register new reports, until the matter had the chance to go through the mediation process.
- The landlord’s refusal to register any new reports pending the mediation was not appropriate. This failed to consider that new ASB reports could be unrelated. Its refusal to accept new reports was not in line with its policy and was not fair or justified in the circumstances.
- The resident reported (on 23 May 2023) that the neighbour had come to her doorstep shouting and being aggressive. She reported another incident on 2 June 2023 of the neighbour throwing cigarette butts into the garden. She felt the neighbour was “waiting for her to hit” them and had spat at her. She had contacted the police. Such behaviour would be classed as ASB under the ASB policy. Despite this, the landlord failed to register these or respond to these reports in any way.
- On 9 June 2023, the resident made another complaint and said:
- She had been experiencing issues with her neighbour for over a year. The neighbour was subjecting her to “constant harassment verbal abuse and intimidation”. The landlord was not investigating her reports and had taken the neighbour’s side. She requested a new Neighbourhood Officer.
- She had been cleaning the neighbour’s rubbish from the garden.
- She could hear screeching chairs and banging doors. An engineer had told her that there was a problem with the floorboards.
- The landlord visited the property on 23 June 2023. It sent its stage 1 response that same day and said:
- Without evidence it could not progress the matter further. The resident had the Noise App and diary sheets but had not used these. She had agreed to record the noise for the next 14 days. It had also given her an incident diary to complete and return in a prepaid envelope.
- While at the property, it had heard footsteps. This was the type of noise expected when living in a ground floor flat.
- There was no evidence that the neighbour caused deliberate noise or stamped their feet.
- It had confirmed that the floors had a concrete base and did not have floorboards.
- The resident had shown a photograph of a cigarette butt, however she had not seen the neighbour drop this. It asked her to keep taking photographs. If evidence was provided, it would speak to the neighbour.
- The resident had provided log numbers from the police (about threatening behaviour). It would work with the police about these to determine the next steps.
- The resident escalated her complaint on 27 June 2023 and said that the landlord should provide noise reducing floorboards. She was willing to buy them and have the landlord fit them.
- The landlord responded at stage 2 on 27 July 2023 and said:
- It summarised the action it had taken since October 2022. This included that it had explained that it would need evidence. It had supplied the Noise App and an incident diary but the resident had still not provided evidence.
- It had attended the block at the resident’s request but found no issues. The footsteps it had heard were everyday noise.
- It could not fit floorboards due to the type of flooring and would not do soundproofing.
- It had referred the resident and the neighbour for mediation. It acknowledged that this should have been done sooner and it apologised for this.
- It apologised that it had not proactively responded to the reports of ASB (aggressive behaviour) between May and June 2023. It should have logged and managed these under its ASB procedure. It had reported this failure to a senior manager and asked them to investigate why this did not happen. This would be dealt with under its internal staff conduct processes. It had asked that a reminder be sent to appropriate staff on dealing with ASB.
- To acknowledge its failure, it offered £150 compensation.
- The landlord appropriately acknowledged its failure to respond to the reports of aggressive behaviour (ASB) by the neighbour. Following this acknowledgement in the stage 2 response, it opened an ASB case that same day.
- The landlord demonstrated that it had taken its failure seriously. It outlined the steps it had taken internally for the failure to be reviewed by a senior member of staff. This was appropriate and demonstrated that it sought to understand why this failure had occurred and prevent it from happening again.
- The landlord has been clear throughout its communication with the resident that it would need evidence of the behaviour she had reported in order to take action against the neighbour. It tried to assist the resident with this, by offering to help her set up the Noise App and providing a pre-paid envelope for her to return a competed incident diary. Despite these steps, no evidence was provided.
- It was reasonable to refer the resident and the neighbour for mediation as a way to try to resolve the reported issues. The neighbour did not engage with this.
- The landlord listened to the resident’s concerns about whether the structure of the flooring was causing noise transference. It confirmed that there were no floorboards. It also advised why it could not lay soundproof floorboards due to the structure of the existing flooring. The resident accepted the compensation offered and said she would use it to soundproof the property. The resident is able to look into soundproofing options, however the landlord appropriately managed her expectations that it would not install this for her due to limitations with the flooring type. It was also reasonable for the landlord to not consider soundproofing without having received any evidence of noises above everyday living noises.
- When a failure is identified, we consider whether the redress offered by the landlord resolved the complaint. The redress of an apology and £150 compensation was in line with what remedy and range of compensation we would expect to see under our remedies guidance, where there has been a failure which adversely affected the resident. The landlord appropriately identified its failures in responding to reports of possible ASB. It apologised, took internal action, and offered proportionate compensation. This also showed it followed the Ombudsman’s Dispute Resolution Principles to be fair, put things right, and learn from outcomes. As such, there was reasonable redress by the landlord for its response to the resident’s reports of noise nuisance and ASB.
Determination (decision)
- In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Scheme, there was reasonable redress in respect of the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of noise nuisance and ASB.