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

London Borough of Camden Council (202322301)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202322301

Camden Council

14 July 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 landlords handling of the resident’s:

  1. Reports of anti–social behaviour and harassment (ASB).
  2. Request to be rehoused.

2.             The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Jurisdiction

3.             What the Ombudsman can and cannot consider is called the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. This is governed by the Scheme. When a complaint is brought to this service, the Ombudsman must consider all the circumstances of the case, as there are sometimes reasons why a complaint will not be investigated.

4.             Paragraph 42.k of the Scheme says the Ombudsman may not investigate complaints which fall properly within the jurisdiction of another Ombudsman, regulator or complaint-handling body.

5.             In this instance part of the resident’s complaint to the Ombudsman involves the landlord’s response to her request to be rehoused.

6.             Any matters in relation to housing allocations under Housing Act 1996 Part 6 fall under the jurisdiction of the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman. Therefore, we will not investigate the landlord’s response to the resident’s request to be rehoused. This is in line with paragraph 42.k of the Scheme.

Background

7.             The resident has been a secure tenant of the landlord since October 2021. The property is a first floor studio flat.

8.             In July 2023 the resident reported to the landlord that she was experiencing harassment involving verbal abuse, intimidation and threatening behaviour from the family living down the road (the neighbours). She said she was unable to walk down the street without experiencing verbal and intimidating harassment from them and their friends. She said she lived alone and did not feel safe. The resident had applied for rehousing due to the alleged harassment and she asked that the landlord transfer her to a different area.

9.             The resident raised a complaint on 17 August 2023. She said that for 4 months she had been subjected to persistent harassment and threatening behaviour from her neighbours. She said she felt the landlord had been dismissive of her reports and that it would only intervene if there was physical harm. She said that she had initiated the community trigger process and asked to be relocated to another area, but had been told she did not qualify because there had been no physical harm. She said that due to the nature of the ASB and the landlord’s lack of intervention she had become more socially isolated as she did not feel safe.

10.        The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 5 October 2023. It said that following the resident’s reports it had spoken to the neighbour’s and they had made counter allegations about the resident’s behaviour. It said its community safety team had reviewed the case and agreed it had taken the appropriate action by adding 75 harassment points to her rehousing application. It said it had outlined these actions to the resident in a letter dated 9 September 2023. It said it was satisfied it had dealt with the case appropriately and she had been offered a referral to the ASB support service. It said it had also given her advice around reporting any ASB.

11.        The resident escalated her complaint to stage 2 on 5 October 2023. A copy of this has not been provided.

12.        The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 7 November 2023. It said the incidents reported did not meet the threshold for harassment status and asked the resident to continue to report incidents of ASB to her housing officer. It also said that where counter allegations apply she needed to have substantial evidence and the images she had provided did not show any harassment taking place.

13.        On 11 December 2023 the resident confirmed that she wanted this Service to investigate the complaint. She said she felt that the final response did not have any resolution and did not address the lack of help from the landlord with the ASB.

Assessment and findings

Reports of ASB

14.        It is not the Ombudsman’s role to decide whether behaviour reported by a resident amounts to ASB. The Ombudsman’s role in these types of complaints is to consider the evidence available to determine whether the landlord acted reasonably in the circumstances of the case.

15.        The landlord’s ASB policy says that when it receives a report of ASB it will investigate by:

  1. Speak directly to all parties involved first to understand the allegation and different perspectives including the perpetrator/s.
  2. Carrying out interviews.
  3. Collate evidence, such as asking victims to complete diary sheets, send photos or videos, witness statements, or provide a crime record number if applicable.
  4. Use mediation where possible.
  5. Give verbal or written warnings to the perpetrator/s.
  6. Use Acceptable Behaviour Contracts (ABCs) or Acceptable Behaviour Agreements (ABAs).
  7. Making referrals to services or agencies who provide support around mental health, substance misuse, or domestic violence and abuse.
  8. Request disclosure from the Police in respect of any criminal activity if there has been a crime reported.
  9. Where possible bring together people harmed by a crime and those responsible to share how the actions impacted individuals and communities, supporting them to repair the harm or rebuild relationships.

16.        When receiving reports of ASB, the Ombudsman would expect the landlord to carry out an investigation into the reports. This may include speaking to both parties to gather their version of events, speaking to any witnesses, reviewing diary logs or noise recordings and liaising with the police or other agencies where appropriate. After reviewing the evidence gathered, the landlord would then determine the most appropriate action on a case-by-case basis. In practice, the options available to a landlord to resolve a case of ASB can be extremely limited and may not extend to the resident’s preferred outcome. It is therefore important to consider whether the landlord has acted in line with its policies and good industry practice.

17.        The resident first reported to the landlord that she was the victim of ASB on 6 July 2023. She said she had reported 3 instances of ASB to the police and provided the CAD numbers. She said her neighbour had threatened her and she felt scared as she lived alone. She also said she had contacted victim support but they had a very long queue.

18.        The landlord responded to the resident the same day. It advised her to avoid any contact with the occupants of that address as well as to keep a diary of any incidents. It asked the resident to report any further incidents and said it would monitor the situation.

19.        On 26 July 2023 the landlord requested police disclosure. It then spoke to the resident on 27 July 2023 and completed a tenant incident report (TIR). The resident said that the first incident was on 27 May 2023 and involved the resident’s mother and sister who live next door to the neighbours in question. The resident said that after this initial incident there had been 3 more between 16 June and 11 July 2023. She said that in each instance the neighbours had starred at her, intimidated her and shouted verbal abuse. Following the completion of the TIR the resident reported 2 more instances of harassment on 13 and 21 August 2023. The information seen also shows that on 16 August 2023 the resident attended an ASB review meeting. During this meeting she informed the panel about the impact the alleged ASB had on her and asked the landlord to rehouse her.

20.        The landlord issued its TIR outcome letter on 5 September 2023. It said that following notification of the resident’s report it had applied ‘harassment status’ and awarded 75 harassment points in line with its allocations scheme. It confirmed that it felt it had taken the appropriate actions under the circumstances of the case.

21.        It was appropriate for the landlord to interview the resident and obtain further details regarding the alleged ASB. However, the Ombudsman has not seen evidence of what, if any, actions the landlord took following the resident’s initial reports. In an email dated 24 August 2023 the landlord told the resident it had spoken to the neighbours about her reports. It said that during these discussions they had made counter allegations and said she was the one being abusive and recording them on her phone. It also said that without any evidence it was unable to take any action due to both parties making allegations about each other.

22.        However, the landlord has not provided evidence of any discussions with the neighbours regarding the resident’s reports. The Ombudsman previously asked the landlord to provide copies or details of any correspondence with the neighbours about the resident’s reports. In response the landlord provided copies of correspondence with the neighbours which pre-dated the resident’s reports and is in fact regarding the neighbours reporting ASB in June 2023. Without evidence of any steps the landlord took to talk to the neighbours and investigate the resident’s reports, the Ombudsman is unable to conclude that it took all reasonable steps to investigate the reported ASB and gather evidence.

23.        Additionally, it is unclear if the landlord received a response from the police to its disclosure request dated 26 July 2023. This is because the landlord’s TIR decision letter issued on 5 September 2023 said that disclosure had been obtained. However, in response to the Ombudsman’s information request the landlord said it had not received any response to the disclosure request. The landlord has also not provided evidence of having chased the police following the initial request for disclosure. As such, the landlord gave inaccurate information to the resident and failed to proactively evidence gather.

24.        The records show the resident made 3 more reports of ASB between 12 and 23 September 2023. The resident’s report on 23 September 2023 also included a photo which she said showed her being ‘visually harassed’ near her property by one of the neighbours. She said she believed they were trying to find out where she lived. The landlord acknowledged these reports on 26 September 2023. It confirmed it had logged these reports but said the photo the resident had provided did not evidence harassment. The resident was dissatisfied with this response and continued to email the landlord to deny the counter allegations made against her, to ask what evidence it had been provided to support the counter allegations and to say that she felt the landlord was challenging her evidence dismissively. In a response dated 18 October 2023 the landlord said that because counter allegations applied the resident needed to provide substantial evidence of harassment taking place and that what she had provided so far did not.

25.        The Ombudsman appreciates that in cases of alleged ASB the actions a landlord can take are limited unless evidence provided by a resident clearly shows ASB has taken place. That said, the Ombudsman has not seen evidence to show the landlord carried out any secondary intervention, for example offering mediation and/or a good neighbour agreement, after concluding there was insufficient evidence to establish ASB. It is good industry practice to try and resolve neighbour disputes at a local level where there is insufficient evidence to establish ASB. In this instance, the landlord was unable to establish ASB and awarded the resident 75 harassment points but did not take any further action. This was unreasonable and not in keeping with good industry practice.

26.        In its submissions to this Service, provided in September 2024, the landlord said that at the time its ASB policy did not require a risk assessment and that it had offered mediation but the resident refused this. However, the document the landlord has relied on to show this does not show that it offered mediation and it was rejected. Rather it only contains an email, dated 4 December 2023, in which it recommends the resident talk to her housing officer about any medical issues and asks for any recent crime reference numbers. Additionally, the landlord’s case notes do not mention an offer of mediation.

27.        Overall the landlord’s failures, as set out above, can be summarised as a failing to:

  1. Make all reasonable attempts to gather information from the neighbours and the police following the resident’s reports of ASB.
  2. Follow good industry practice and trying other ways of managing disputes which are not considered as meeting the threshold for ASB intervention.

28.        Cumulatively these failures amount to maladministration as they led to the issues continuing without the landlord making all reasonable attempts to resolve matters between the parties. This in turn caused the resident further distress and inconvenience as she continued to report incidents to the landlord but was always given the same response that nothing more could be done unless she provided further evidence of ASB.

29.        In view of this, the Ombudsman will be ordering the landlord to apologise for the failings identified in this report and to pay the resident £200 compensation. This sum is in line with the Ombudsman’s published remedies guidance for failings where there was a failure by the landlord and it did not acknowledge this and/or made an attempt to put things right. As far as the Ombudsman is aware the landlord has since updated its ASB policy, therefore we will not be ordering a policy review. However, the landlord’s ASB policy says it is yet to create a good neighbourhood management policy. As such the Ombudsman will be recommending that this be completed as soon as possible. This will provide a framework within which the landlord can appropriately deal with reports of ASB at a local level when the criteria for ASB is not met.

Complaint handling

30.        The landlord’s complaints policy at the time said it would respond to a stage 1 complaint within 10 working days but that this could be extended to 20 working days in ‘complex cases’. It also said the landlord would respond to stage 2 complaints within 25 working days but that this could be extended to 65 working days in ‘complex cases’. However, the Ombudsman’s complaint handling code (the Code) says landlords must respond to stage 2 complaints within 20 working days. The Code also says that if more time is required then this must be agreed with the resident and must not exceed a further 10 workings days at stage 1 or 20 working days at stage 2.

31.        The resident raised her complaint on 17 August 2023 and the landlord issued its response on 5 October 2023. This was 35 working days after the resident raised her complaint. This was a significant delay and not in keeping with either the landlord’s complaints policy or the Code. Additionally, the Ombudsman has not seen evidence to explain why there was such a delay in it responding to the resident’s stage 1 complaint nor that it communicated with her about it. Without such an explanation the Ombudsman cannot but conclude that such a delay was unnecessary and unreasonable.

32.        The resident escalated her complaint on 5 October 2023, the landlord issued its stage 2 response on 7 November 2023, this was 23 working days after the resident’s escalation request. The landlord’s response was 3 working days late and not compliant with the timescales referenced within the Code. However, whilst any delay would have caused some level of inconvenience for the resident, overall, the delay was not excessive.

33.        Overall the landlord’s failures, as set out above, can be summarised as failing to adhere to the timescales set out in its complaints policy and the Code. Cumulatively this failure amounts to a service failure as it led to a significant delay in the landlord responding to the resident’s stage 1 complaint.

34.        In view of this, the Ombudsman will be ordering the landlord to apologise for the failings identified in this report and pay £100 compensation. This sum is in line with the Ombudsman’s published remedies guidance for failings which did not have an impact on the outcome of the complaint nor a lasting impact on the resident. The Ombudsman is aware that the landlord has since updated the complaints policy on its website and brought it in line with the Code. Therefore we will not order it to carry out a policy review.

Determination (decision)

35.        In accordance with paragraph 42.k of the Scheme, the resident’s complaint about the landlord’s handling of her request to be rehoused is outside of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

36.        In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration by the landlord in relation to its handling of the resident’s reports of ASB.

37.        In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was a service failure by the landlord in relation to its complaint handling.

Orders

38.        Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord must:

  1. Apologise to the resident for its failures. This written apology must be from a member of the landlord’s senior management team and should follow the Ombudsman’s apologies guidance on our website.
  1. Directly pay the resident £200 compensation for its handling of her reports of ASB.
  2. Directly pay the resident £100 compensation for the handling of the complaint.

39.        The landlord is to reply to this Service to provide evidence of compliance with these orders within the timescales set out above.

Recommendation

40.        If it has not done so, the landlord should develop and publish a good neighbourhood management policy on its website.

41.        The landlord should write to this Service within 4 weeks of the date of this determination to set out its intentions regarding the above recommendation.