Peabody Trust (202223158)

 

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202223158

Peabody Trust

9 December 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 resident’s complaint is about the landlords handling of his reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB) and unauthorised occupants in a neighbour’s property

2.             This service has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background and summary of events

3.             The resident is a secure tenant of the landlord and has lived at the property since 1998. The property is a first floor, one-bedroom flat. The landlord is a Housing Association. 

4.             On 25 October 2022, the resident contacted the landlord to report incidents of ASB. He said he was being harassed and verbally abused by the unauthorised people living with the tenant above. He said he wanted the landlord to conduct a search of the flat above and that he wanted to be present for this. He said he had also reported the issue to the police.

5.             The landlord responded the same day, explaining that they had already conducted a search of the property above and that they could not conduct another search of the tenant above’s property. It said mediation was the best way forward.

6.             On 28 October 2022, the resident emailed the landlord, explaining that the reported ASB was negatively impacting his physical and mental health.  He said there was a lot of noise due to 3 adults living in the bedroom, while the tenant stayed in the living room. He again said he should be present at the search of the property and that he wanted the landlord to evict the tenant. He also said the landlord’s mediator had contacted him to say the neighbour had decided she did not want to engage in mediation with him.

7.             The landlord opened an ASB case. It responded the same day offering to refer him to its Wellbeing Team for support with his health.

8.             The resident made his complaint to the landlord on 7 February 2023. He said the behaviour of the people living in the flat above impacted on his sleep and on his mental health.

9.             The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 9 June 2023. It said, having completed its investigation, it had concluded that the ASB team had carried out the correct actions in relation to the issues raised by the resident and it said it would not be evicting the upstairs tenant.

10.        On 13 June 2023, the resident escalated his complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints process. He again referred to the 3 additional people in the flat upstairs and how they intimidated and mocked him. He explained how severely their behaviours affected him.

11.        On 22 September 2023, the landlord issued its stage 2 response. It did not uphold the resident’s complaint about how ASB had been investigated. It said it would encourage the resident to continue to report any incidents of ASB, with supporting evidence where possible.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

12.        The resident has said that he had been having difficulty with the tenant upstairs since he moved in, in 1998, but that it had got progressively worse. However, there is no evidence that any formal complaints were raised by the resident until 7 February 2023. We have seen evidence that the resident first reported incidents of ASB from October 2022. At the time of the complaint, the landlord’s complaints policy, said it will not usually deal with complaints where the issue giving rise to the complaint happened over six months ago. This investigation will therefore consider events from October 2022, on the basis of what the Ombudsman considers to be a reasonable period in light of the provisions of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme and the available evidence.

13.        As such, while this report may reference historical events for context, the scope of this investigation will be limited to consideration of the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB from October 2022 onwards, until the final complaint response on 22 September 2023.

Reports of ASB

14.        The resident reported his experiences of ASB to the landlord on 25 October 2022. He said that he was constantly being harassed and verbally abused by the 3 unauthorised people living with the tenant above. He said he wanted the landlord to make a thorough search of the flat above him, and that he must be present for the search. He explained how the ASB was negatively impacting on his physical and mental health. He said he wanted the landlord to evict the tenant upstairs. He wanted to try mediation with the neighbour in an attempt to resolve matters, but said the tenant above had decided she did not want to engage in mediation with him.

15.        The landlord responded the same day, acknowledging the resident’s reports of ASB. It said a thorough inspection of the neighbour’s flat above had already taken place and there was definitely no one other than the authorised tenant living in the property. It said it had also spoken with other neighbours. It said the tenant above had the right to decline mediation, and it had no basis upon which to evict her. It offered to refer the resident to its Wellbeing Team for support with his health. It also suggested the resident make digital recordings of any incidents of ASB, which it could then pursue further.

16.        Having reviewed the landlord’s files, we have seen evidence that the landlord was visiting the tenant upstairs on a regular basis throughout 2023. The file notes for these attendances do reassure us that the landlord has taken appropriate steps to establish that there were no unauthorised people living in the flat with her.

17.        On 27 January 2023, the landlord issued the resident with a written warning. It explained that this was because it had been informed that the resident had sent 2 letters to the tenant above. These, it said, had caused alarm and distress to the elderly lady living there alone. It stressed this behaviour must stop and any concerns should be made through the landlord, not directly with the tenant. The resident responded the same day, insisting that the property above had never been searched. He said he had seen the additional 3 residents in the flat above, 1 woman and 2 men, with his own eyes. He said it was unfair that he was the one receiving a written tenancy warning when it should be the neighbour above. He said he wanted to arrange a meeting with the landlord’s Community Safety Specialist.

18.        The landlord and the resident exchanged several emails over the following week to arrange a meeting, but on 8 February 2023, the resident emailed the landlord to say he no longer felt the need to meet with the landlord, saying he had already stated quite clearly what he wanted to be done. The landlord acknowledged this, saying, “you have mentioned that your mental health is being severely affected, if you would like a referral to our Wellbeing Team, I am happy to put you in touch with them. Please let me know. Alternatively, you can call the local mental health ‘single point of access’ service”. It provided the contact number for this service.

19.        The landlord’s ASB policy says, “All customers who wish to report an incident of ASB will be assessed for their risk and vulnerability to ensure the appropriate level of support can be provided and any safeguarding issues are identified”. It also says it will work in partnership and consult with customers, the wider public, statutory services, local authorities … and other external agencies as necessary to tackle ASB in our neighbourhoods and provide support to those with vulnerabilities”.

20.        We have seen evidence that, in line with this policy, the landlord did assess the resident’s vulnerability and noted that the resident had made reference to his mental health. It did try several times, from as early as 28 October 2022, to refer the resident to its own, as well as external sources of wellbeing and mental health support. These were positive actions from the landlord.

21.        The landlord’s ASB policy also says, “We consider the possible vulnerability of both victims and perpetrators of ASB when deciding the intervention actions appropriate to dealing with each case. We recognise that perpetrators may not be deliberately causing ASB and indeed may be victims themselves. We work with local authorities and other agencies providing support to vulnerable people to obtain the appropriate support and achieve positive outcomes for our customers, including making behavioural changes or safeguarding individuals”.

22.        In terms of what the resident was asking of the landlord in its handling of his ASB reports, we do understand why it would not have been proportionate for the resident to be present at searches carried out at the upstairs tenant’s property. The tenant above was an elderly lady who lived alone and who had been distressed by the resident’s letters. Similarly, it was not proportionate or reasonable, based on the evidence available, for the tenant upstairs to be evicted.  We are satisfied the landlord’s actions in relation to this were appropriate and in line with its ASB policy guidance.

23.        The landlord’s ASB policy also says it may consider a management transfer for those assessed as at risk, in line with the criteria outlined in its rehousing policy. We have seen evidence that the landlord advised and assisted the resident in making his application to be transferred to another property.

24.        The landlord’s ASB policy also says, “we close a case after investigation and appropriate action is taken and where no further action can be taken”. In this case we are satisfied that the landlord did do what it could in relation to the resident’s reports of ASB and that there was no further action it could reasonably have taken.

25.        When investigating, the Ombudsman is concerned to establish whether the member has been responsible for maladministration (which includes findings of service failure, maladministration and severe maladministration). In this case, based on the available evidence, we have seen that the landlord did take the resident’s reports of ASB seriously and it acted upon them. On balance, we are satisfied that the landlord did respond appropriately to the resident’s reports of ASB, and its handling of the resident’s situation was in line with its policy. While the Ombudsman does not dispute the distress experienced by the resident, we have not identified any maladministration in the landlord’s handling of his reports of ASB.

Complaint handling

26.        The landlord operates a 2-stage complaints policy. This says:

1. New complaints are logged within five working days as a stage one complaint and a response will be provided within 10 working days of the complaint being acknowledged.
2. If the landlord needs more time, it will provide an explanation to the resident containing a clear timeframe for when the response will be received. This should not exceed a further 10 days without good reason.
3. The stage one investigation will be carried out by a case manager who is fully trained to handle complaints.
4. If a complaint is raised to stage two of its process, an independent review of the complaint will be carried out by an independent team of Senior Complaint Reviewers.
5. All requests for escalation to stage two must be received within 10 working days of receiving the stage one response.
6. A stage two response will be acknowledged within 5 working days of the escalation request being received. A full response will be provided within 20 working days of the request being acknowledged.
7. If the landlord needs more time, it will provide an explanation to the resident containing a clear timeframe for when the response will be received. This should not exceed a further 20 days without good reason.

27.        The landlord’s complaints policy also says there are matters that will not be dealt with through its complaints procedure. This includes first time reporting of noise or ASB.

28.        On 23 January 2023, the resident contacted this service, saying he had not received a response from the landlord about his complaint about the 3 unauthorised residents living in the flat above. It became evident however, that although the resident had made reports about ASB, he had not raised a complaint about the landlord’s handling of his ASB reports. We signposted him to the landlord’s online complaints form.

29.        The landlord’s complaints policy defines a complaint as “an expression of dissatisfaction, however made, about the standard of service, action or lack of action, by the organisation, our employees, or those acting on our behalf”.

30.        Following contact from the tenant upstairs and the subsequent warning issued by the landlord to the resident, the resident did say he was dissatisfied with the way the landlord had treated him in relation to his reports of ASB. While this could be understood as a complaint under the landlord’s complaints policy definition, we can also see that this email to the landlord closes with the resident requesting a meeting with the landlord.

31.        The landlord’s Community Safety Specialist responded on 30 January, saying he would be happy to meet with the resident. Despite offering various days and times of day, and offering home visits, the resident emailed on 8 February, saying he had decided a meeting was no longer necessary.  As the resident had said that his mental health was being severely affected by the ASB, the landlord also wrote to the resident confirming he had cancelled the meeting, and again offered to refer the resident to its Wellbeing Team and it also provided the contact number for the local mental health service.

32.        On balance, it is reasonable, that in line with its complaints policy, the resident’s reports of ASB were initially dealt with under the landlord’s ASB policy, as at that stage, the resident had not indicated that he wanted a formal complaint to be made. 

33.        On 3 April 2023, the resident contacted our service. He provided evidence of having now made a formal complaint to the landlord, via its online complaint form, on 7 February 2023. He said he had not received any response from the landlord.

34.        Although the landlord’s complaints policy says new complaints are logged within 5 working days, the landlord did not acknowledge the resident’s complaint. This is not in line with its complaints policy. Our Complaint Handling Code also says, at paragraph 6.2., complaints must be acknowledged, defined and logged at stage 1 of the landlord’s complaints procedure within 5 working days of the complaint being received. To have not acknowledged the resident’s complaint is a failing on the part of the landlord.

35.        On 28 April 2023, we wrote to the landlord asking it to respond to the resident’s complaint by 23 May 2023. The landlord wrote to the resident the same day, acknowledging his complaint, and offering a meeting with the resident to discuss it.

36.        On 23 May 2023, the resident contacted our service to say he had not yet received a stage 1 response. We wrote to the landlord again, asking it to issue its stage 1 response by 9 June 2023.

37.        On 9 June 2023, the landlord issued its stage 1 response to the resident. This said, having completed its investigation, its view was that its ASB team had carried out the correct actions in relation to the issues raised by the resident.

38.        The landlord’s complaints policy says a stage 1 response will be provided within 10 working days.  It also says, “if we need more time we will provide and explanation to the resident containing a clear time frame for when the response will be received. This should not exceed ten days without good reason. If an extension beyond 20 working days is required, this should be agreed by both parties”.  In this case, although the landlord did contact the resident with a request for an extension, the resident did not agree to it.

39.        The resident complained on 7 February 2023 and the stage 1 response was not issued until 9 June 2023, 84 working days later. The complaint response does not apologise for or explain the delay, nor does it acknowledge that its response is far outside its complaints policy timescale commitment. This delay is also not in line with this service’s Complaint Handling Code. This says that landlords must issue a full response to stage 1 complaints within 10 working days of the complaint being acknowledged. This delay was a failing on the part of the landlord.

40.        The stage 1 response did explain to the resident that if he remains dissatisfied with its response, he had the right to escalate his complaint to stage 2 of its complaints process within 10 working days.

41.        On 13 June 2023, the resident escalated his complaint to stage 2 of the landlord’s complaints process. He again referred to how the 3 behaviours of the 3 additional people living in the flat above severely affected him.

42.        The resident contacted this service on 28 July 2023, to say he had still not been provided with a stage 2 response.  We wrote to the landlord that day asking it to respond to the resident by 7 August 2023.

43.        The landlord said it had not received the resident’s escalation request and so should have the full time to respond (20 working days). However, the escalation request was made by email to the landlord on 13 June 2023, and we had provided a copy of this to the landlord. Therefore, the landlord had been in receipt of the escalation request for 34 working days.

44.        It is understandable that emails can inadvertently get missed or misfiled. However, following further contact from the resident, saying he had still not received a stage 2 response, we wrote to the landlord again on 18 September 2023, asking it to provide its stage 2 response by no later than 25 September 2023.

45.        On 22 September 2023, the landlord issued its stage 2 response. It did not uphold the resident’s complaint. However, it did acknowledge, explain and apologise for its complaint handling delays, and it offered the resident a total of £250 in compensation. This comprised £100 to reflect the trouble and inconvenience its poor communication with the resident had caused, and £150 to reflect its delays in its complaint handling.

46.        When we consider complaint handling, we consider both the complaint handling itself, as well as what the landlord has already done to put things right. We recognise that it must have been very frustrating for the resident to be kept waiting for extended periods of time. However, in our view, the landlord’s apology and offer of compensation is in line with our guidance on remedies, in cases where maladministration has occurred, but there is no permanent impact. We consider it to be reasonable therefore by way of remedying the impact of its complaint handling failings.

47.        The Ombudsman finds that the landlord’s apology and offer of compensation represents reasonable redress for the failings in its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Determination

48.        In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports of ASB.

49.        In accordance with paragraph 53.b. of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord made an offer of redress to the resident which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the complaints concerning its handling of the resident’s complaint.

Recommendations

50.        The landlord is encouraged to reoffer the £250 compensation offered in its stage 2 complaint response, if it has not already been paid.