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

Nottingham City Council (202211762)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202211762

Nottingham City Council

31 March 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 antisocial behaviour (ASB).

Background

  1. The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord, a local authority. It is aware that the resident has mental health conditions.
  2. The resident contacted the landlord in 2021 and 2022 to report that her neighbours were causing ASB. Her reports included, visitors causing noise late at night, rubbish left in communal areas, drug dealing, prostitution and intimidation and harassment.
  3. The resident complained to the landlord on 30 August 2022. She said there was ongoing ASB from her neighbours. She had attempted to report this throughout August 2022 and was unhappy with its lack of communication.
  4. The landlord sent its stage 1 response on 26 September 2022. It said that it had tried to contact the resident to gather more information on the issues but had not been successful. It asked the resident to contact the police to report any suspected criminal activity and said it would be more proactive in its inspection of communal areas. It apologised that her enjoyment of her surroundings had been affected.
  5. The landlord escalated the complaint to stage 2 on 13 July 2023 at the request of this Service. The resident was unhappy with its management of her ASB reports and said the issues were ongoing. She told it that its staff member responsible for dealing with the ASB was not doing so adequately and requested that another member of staff replaced them.
  6. The landlord responded at stage 2 of its complaint process on 14 September 2023. It gave a comprehensive breakdown of its previous responses to the reported ASB. It recognised there had been instances where it did not adhere to its ASB policy and communicated poorly. It apologised for this and for its communication not meeting expected standards. It offered the resident £150 in compensation for these failures. It gave a detailed explanation of the actions it would take to address the ASB and learning it had gained through the complaint. It said that it would not be replacing individual staff members and would set up additional training where it felt necessary.
  7. The resident was unhappy with the landlord’s response and brought her complaint to us. She wanted it to resolve the ASB and replace the member of staff.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. When investigating a complaint about a member landlord, we will consider the response of the landlord as a whole. We will only comment on the actions of individuals as far as they are acting on behalf of the landlord. Therefore, if the actions of an individual member of staff give rise to a failure in service, our determination and any associated orders and recommendations are directed at the landlord rather than the individual. We will not order a landlord to take disciplinary action against individual staff members.
  2. The resident’s requests for the landlord’s staff member to be replaced are noted. However, the outcome the resident is seeking is not within the remit of this Service to order. We do not have the authority to instruct the landlord to take such action. As such, we have considered the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB), and if its response was reasonable in the circumstances.
  3. The role of the Housing Ombudsman is to assess the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint to ascertain whether it took reasonable steps to resolve complaints within its internal process. This investigation has, therefore, focused on the events and evidence from August 2022 leading up to its final response on 14 September 2023. Any events prior to August 2022 and following its stage 2 response are mentioned in this report for context purposes only.

Reports of ASB

  1. The landlord has adopted the Crime and Policing Act 2014 definition of ASB, which is conduct which has caused, or is likely to cause:
    1. Harassment, alarm or distress to any person.
    2. Annoyance to a person in relation to that person’s occupation of residential premises.
    3. Housing-related nuisance or annoyance to any person.
  2. ASB case management is a crucial aspect of a landlord’s service delivery. Effective use of a robust ASB procedure enables the landlord to identify appropriate steps to resolve potential areas of conflict, improve landlord/tenant relationships and improve the experience of tenants residing in their homes. Retaining accurate records also provides transparency to the decision-making process and an audit trail after the event.
  3. When considering the evidence provided in this case it is apparent that there have been failures by the landlord to keep robust records. This has affected our ability to accurately assess the timeline of events and whether some of the landlord’s actions were fair and reasonable. Our investigation has therefore focussed on the evidence available to determine this complaint.
  4. As highlighted in our spotlight report on knowledge and information management, it is vitally important that landlord’s keep detailed records of all actions taken. This allows the landlord to account for its actions and decisions to residents and this Service, where required.
  5. A landlord has 2 main duties when it receives a report of ASB. The first is to gather evidence and undertake a proportionate investigation. The second is to balance that evidence and decide what action it should take. Our role is to determine if it investigated fairly and took all the action it could.
  6. The resident contacted the landlord 4 times in August 2022 to report instances of ASB. They concerned several different neighbours and their visitors. The reports included loud noise late at night, rubbish and items left in the communal area and threatening behaviour. On 28 August 2022 she contacted the police to report that criminal activity, including prostitution, was taking place from a neighbouring property.
  7. The landlord’s ASB policy states that reports of antisocial behaviour, will be acknowledged within 1 working day. The landlord will draw up an initial report and assessment, which will determine its response timescale. It will then interview the complainant, carry out a risk assessment and agree an action plan with them.
  8. There is no evidence that the landlord conducted any of these steps upon receiving the reports of ASB from the resident in August 2022. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to open a new ASB case at this point, in line with its policy. The fact that it did not do so was a missed opportunity to address the resident’s concerns.
  9. The landlord’s stage 1 complaint response failed to address in detail the resident’s concerns over how her reports of ASB were managed. It would have been appropriate for it to complete an action plan in discussion with the resident to ensure that she was clear about how it intended to handle any further incidents. Its response did not fully recognise, or offer redress for, its failure to adhere to its ASB policy.
  10. The resident made further reports of ASB in November 2022. It was positive that the landlord contacted her upon receipt of the reports. It arranged a joint visit with the police to discuss her concerns and agree an action plan. This visit was cancelled by the resident as she said she had not been given enough notice of the appointment. It would have been reasonable of the landlord to rearrange its visit and open a new ASB case to address the issues raised, in accordance with its policy.
  11. The resident contacted the landlord on 16 April 2023 to report suspected vandalism to her front door. The landlord opened a new ASB case, completed a risk assessment and agreed an action plan with her. It reviewed CCTV footage and interviewed the alleged perpetrator. It found damage to the door was caused accidentally whilst a neighbour was moving furniture into their property. These actions were appropriate and in line with its ASB policy. It demonstrated that it listened to the resident’s concerns and took reasonable and proportionate measures to address the neighbour’s behaviour. It left the ASB case open to address any further incidents.
  12. The landlord’s records show that it regularly reviewed the ASB case between April 2023 and September 2023. During this time, it provided noise monitoring equipment to the resident and discussed incidents with the police and security team working in the area. In her contact with us, leading to her complaint escalation, the resident expressed her dissatisfaction with the landlord’s handling of her reports of ASB. The resident had reported new incidents of ASB to this Service, the police and her local security team, however the evidence shows she was not contacting the landlord. The resident’s hesitance to engage with the landlord regarding the issues, has made its ability to resolve them a challenge.
  13. In its stage 2 response the landlord gave a comprehensive breakdown of its response to the resident’s reports of ASB. It detailed the action it had taken upon contact from her, including arranging visits to discuss the issues. It is important to note that, although the resident has not disputed the events discussed in the response, this Service has not seen evidence of each event mentioned. When assessing its response, we have considered if its overall approach was reasonable and appropriate in the circumstances.
  14. The landlord acknowledged its failings, apologised and offered redress to the resident. It set out several measures it would take to address the poor handling of the resident’s reports of ASB. Examples of these, such as implementing staff training, amending the ASB policy regarding communication preferences and informing the resident of its ASB case review process, were appropriate. It signposted the resident to suitable support services and gave a detailed plan on actions that it would take to address the ASB.
  15. Where there are failings by a landlord, as is the case here, this Service will consider whether the redress offered by it (including an apology and compensation) put things right and resolved the resident’s complaint satisfactorily in the circumstances. In considering this, this Service considers whether the landlord’s offer of redress was in line with our dispute resolution principles to be fair, put things right and learn from outcomes.
  16. The evidence shows that in its stage 2 investigation, the landlord took a number of steps to ensure it fully understood the issues raised. Actions such as setting up a single point of contact and speaking regularly with the resident during the investigation, were reasonable and demonstrated it had listened to her concerns. It reiterated the importance of reporting instances of ASB and gave advice on several ways this could be done. It recognised the detriment its failings had caused to the resident and showed a willingness to repair its relationship with her.
  17. When considering all the circumstances of the case, we have considered if its compensation offer is fair and proportionate given the failings identified. The landlord made an offer of compensation of £150, which is in line with our remedies guidance. It is our opinion that this offer was reasonable and along with the other steps taken, amounts to reasonable redress.
  18. Following the landlord’s stage 2 response this Service is aware that the resident has continued to report instances of ASB. The landlord has told us that the resident regularly fails to respond to its attempts to contact her. It has referred her to external intervention and support agencies. These services have also been unsuccessful in their attempts at contact with her. In order to seek a resolution to the ASB issues, good communication between landlord and resident is imperative. Thus, we have made recommendations for the landlord to consider setting up arrangements around its communication with the resident.

Determination (decision)

  1. In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Scheme the landlord has made an offer of redress prior to investigation which, in our opinion, satisfactorily resolves its handling of the resident’s reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB).

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should consider agreeing a single point of contact with the resident to help improve communication. The frequency and means of communication should be mutually agreed. It could also suggest that she appoint a representative to support her in reporting her concerns.