Peter Bedford Housing Association Limited (202310962)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202310962

Peter Bedford Housing Association Limited

12 September 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

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the residents reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB).
The Ombudsman has also considered the landlord’s complaint handling.

Background

The resident is a licensee of the landlord, a housing association, and lives in a 1-bedroom flat on the first floor of a block.
Between 20 July 2022 and 31 October 2022, the resident made several reports of ASB regarding the neighbour in the flat above. The resident reported that her neighbour was causing excessive noise at unsociable hours.
The landlord issued an advisory letter to the neighbour on 23 November 2022 about being mindful of noise. It also issued a letter to the resident on the same date which said that it had spoken to the neighbour and that a counter complaint had been made. It asked the resident to be mindful of any noise she may be making. The landlord said it reviewed the pictures and sound recordings the resident had sent but considered that this did not amount to ASB.
The resident raised her first formal complaint with the landlord on 21 November 2022. She said that the ASB was out of control and that the neighbour’s behaviour had been excused without any consequence. The resident disagreed with the landlord’s view that the noise was normal household noise as it was happening at unsociable hours. She also sent in a list of instances that had happened between 13 and 20 November 2022.
The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 19 December 2022. The response said that it:
1. Listened to the audio and video recordings provided and that it would not class the noise as ASB, particularly as the sound proofing in the older building where the resident lived was not that good.
2. Was satisfied that it took appropriate action regarding the ASB, but that the complaint was partially upheld as the response to the ASB reports was not quick enough.
3. Would remind the neighbour to keep all noise to a minimum between 11pm and 7am. It also asked to visit the resident’s home to try and witness the noise.
4. Wanted to restore a good, neighbourly relationship between the parties and thanked the resident for considering mediation. It asked the resident to let it know if she wanted to proceed with this option.
The resident asked to escalate her complaint on 19 December 2022. She advised that she was disappointed and frustrated with the outcome. She had taken time to share evidence of the ASB and cannot keep recording evidence as this was affecting her mental health. The resident asked for CCTV to be checked regarding her ASB reports.
The landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response on 17 January 2023. The response said that it:
1. Had listened to 57 recordings provided by the resident and concurred with the stage 1 view that the sounds were usual everyday noise. It said that there was not enough evidence to take action and that the resident should continue reporting incidents of ASB.
2. Had reviewed its policy and this did not allow the landlord to use CCTV for any legal action. It had retrieved CCTV recordings and would be in touch about plans to relocate the CCTV.
3. Thanked the resident for a recommendation of a noise recorder and would provide a response about this by 23 January 2023.
The resident reported further instances of ASB on 15 and 21 February 2023. Following a report by the resident on 10 March 2023, the landlord attended the resident’s property. It advised that it had authority from the neighbour to tell the resident that a visitor to the neighbour had been banned due to allegations of domestic violence and this would help resolve the issue. The landlord told the resident to call the police should she feel in danger and to let it know if she wanted to attend mediation.
On 31 March 2023 the resident emailed the landlord to summarise her ASB concerns. She advised that the neighbour should have had a second warning letter, and an acceptable behaviour agreement (ABA) should have been drawn up. The resident expressed her desperation and agreed to professional mediation, asking the landlord to inform her when an appointment was set up.
On 12 May 2023, the resident informed the landlord that the ASB was continuing and requested details of her ASB officer to arrange a meeting.
Between 8 June 2023 and 11 July 2023, the landlord and resident exchanged emails about the ASB. They discussed an advisory letter sent to the resident about her behaviour, a request for an internal transfer, and the installation of CCTV.
On 25 July 2023 the resident raised a second formal complaint. She complained that she:
1. Had not heard from the team for over a month regarding the internal transfer.
2. Received no contact about her CCTV request.
3. Waited 1 month for a response to her email dated 8 June 2023 and only received a response after she chased it.
4. Spent a lot of time documenting ASB but not much had been done to control it.
5. Found it stressful to communicate with the ASB team member due to the team member being rude, lacking in empathy, and not understanding the background of her matter.
The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 3 August 2023, it said:
1. That the complaint about her internal transfer was upheld as the resident was not told about the outcome of her request.
2. The CCTV complaint was upheld as it had not responded to this request despite referring it to the appropriate person several weeks earlier. However, it could confirm that no more CCTV would be installed.
3. That it did not uphold the complaint about a delayed response to the 8 June 2023 email as this was not the individual team member’s fault.
4. That it was satisfied that it was taking the correct course of action to resolve the ASB, and that it had agreed to move the neighbour out of the flat above.
On 23 August 2023 the resident provided a summary of 4 further instances of ASB that occurred between 19 and 23 August 2023. Following this, on 24 August the resident escalated her complaint to stage 2.
In her stage 2 escalation, the resident thanked the landlord for providing the reason it delayed responding to her regarding the CCTV. She said that she disagreed with the landlord failing to uphold her complaint relating to the delay in providing a response to an email, and that it had not responded at all to the complaint about the team member being rude. The resident also provided a list of 35 incidents of ASB between 3 April 2023 and 3 August 2023.
The resident followed sent a further email on 24 August to the landlord reporting another incident of ASB. She also asked what had happened about the potential for mediation as it had been over 7 months since she last heard anything about this.
On 14 September 2023 the landlord told the resident that the new flat it had offered her neighbour required a lot of maintenance. It said that it would take around 4 to 6 weeks for the flat to be ready. The landlord told the resident that she would be able to view the flat above once it was empty to decide if she wanted to transfer.
On 28 September 2023 the landlord told the resident that it would need longer to provide its complaint response. It advised that it would provide a full response by 5 October 2023.
Between 20 and 29 September 2023 the resident exchanged further correspondence with the landlord about ASB. The resident reported 3 instances of ASB and the landlord advised that it had arranged to meet the neighbour to discuss the noise.
On 13 October 2023 the landlord issued its stage 2 complaint response. It said that:
1. It upheld the complaint about a delayed response to the resident’s email.
2. It agreed that it had not responded to the claims its staff member was rude and that training was being provided to ensure all complaints are followed up correctly.
3. The complaint about the handling of ASB was not upheld as the action it had taken was quite swift and a transfer to move the neighbour had been identified.
4. It apologised for the identified failings and offered £25 for the late complaint response and £25 for failing to adhere to its service standards.
5. It would learn from the resident’s complaint and take steps to prevent similar instances from happening again.
The neighbour moved from the property on 20 October 2023. The landlord offered an opportunity for the resident to move into the flat above, however she declined.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

It is noted that there is a long history of ASB reports. However, in the interest of fairness this investigation is limited to the issues raised during the resident’s 2 formal complaints. The investigation has primarily focussed on the landlord’s handling of the resident’s reports between 13 June 2022 to 23 October 2023 covered in the 2 formal complaints.
The resident raised a new formal complaint regarding ASB under different circumstances in February 2024. This will be determined separately under case 202346314.

ASB handling

The landlord’s ASB policy says that it takes a person-centred approach to resolving ASB. Where ASB is identified it will work with relevant agencies to address, eradicate, or reduce inappropriate behaviour. The policy has 4 categories of ASB defined as nuisance, breach of tenancy, harassment, and illegal activity.
The policy says that the landlord will ensure that if a victim believes they have been harassed then the matter will be dealt with as such. It states that victims must not be made to feel that unless proof is provided, they will not be believed.
The landlord will provide initial advice on how to resolve the issue and make an appointment to conduct an interview with the resident alleging the ASB. It will interview other witnesses and talk to the alleged perpetrator if appropriate. It will agree an action plan with the resident and carry out risk assessments at each stage of the process with clear reference to safeguarding. It will take measures such as mediation, multi-agency partnership working, tenancy support and using its enhanced management team (EHM) to try and resolve ASB.
The evidence shows that the landlord failed to take prompt and effective action in line with its policy when the resident initially reported ASB. The resident made contact 5 times with the landlord between 20 July and 28 October 2022 raising concerns about excessive noise especially at unsociable hours. The first evidence of contact made by the landlord about these reports was on 10 November 2022. This was an unreasonable delay of 80 working days before any meaningful contact was made with the resident and led to the resident becoming frustrated with the landlord.
On 23 November 2022, the landlord wrote to the resident, advising her that it had listened to the noise recordings she provided and sent a letter to the neighbour asking them to be mindful of noise. However, there is a lack of evidence to show that the landlord conducted a risk assessment or agreed a plan of action with the resident. It is important a clear plan of action is agreed as this shows that the landlord is taking the report of ASB seriously and is working with the resident to find a suitable resolution. This failure to follow its ASB policy meant that it missed an opportunity to manage the resident’s expectations on the actions it could take.
The failure of the landlord to deal with the initial reports of ASB in line with its policy led to the resident’s first formal complaint. In this complaint the resident described her feelings that the neighbour’s behaviour had been excused without any consequence and that the ASB was ongoing and unbearable.
In its stage 1 response dated 19 December 2022 and its stage 2 response dated 17 January 2023, the landlord did take some positive steps to try and resolve the ASB. It offered the resident the option of mediation and explained that further evidence would be required before any action could be taken against the neighbour. However, it should not have taken the resident to make a complaint about the landlord’s handling of ASB for options such as mediation to be considered. Mediation is often more effective the earlier it takes place, as this option was offered 5 months after the resident’s initial ASB report this further supports that no plan of action was discussed and agreed with the resident.
The resident made further reports of ASB on 21 February and 10 March 2023. The report on 10 March 2023 prompted the landlord to visit the resident’s property to discuss the ASB. The discussion included the offer of mediation and that the landlord spoke with the neighbour about the alleged noise. This action was a positive one and in line with the landlord’s policy on ASB. It treated the situation as urgent, and it attempted to reassure the resident that the neighbour wanted to resolve the ongoing issues. However, there is no evidence to show that the landlord completed or updated any risk assessment, or that it agreed any ‘next steps’ with the resident. Despite the landlord’s positive action, the failure to follow its ASB policy regarding risk assessments and action plans meant that the resident felt frustrated and unsupported.
The resident contacted the landlord on 31 March 2023 to advise that she would agree to mediation by a professional and asked the landlord to let her know when an appointment was set. However, the landlord failed to acknowledge or take action to arrange this mediation. This was a missed opportunity and a failure by the landlord to act on the suggestion it had made to try and resolve the ASB. This reinforced the resident’s view that the landlord was unable to take effective action and furthered her frustration.
On 12 May 2023 the resident told the landlord that the ASB was ongoing and asked for the details of the new ASB officer so she could arrange a meeting. There was no follow up contact with the resident until a phone call on 2 June 2023. This was a delay of 15 working days, which was outside of the 5 working day response time set out in the landlord’s policy. This added to the resident’s frustration and distress.
On 8 June 2023 the resident told the landlord that the ASB was continuing and asked some questions about the installation of CCTV and the length of time it could take for the landlord to agree to an internal transfer for her to move away from the ASB. However, this email was not responded to by the landlord for over 1 month and led, in part, to the resident’s second formal complaint. This is a further unreasonable delay in responding to the resident and is outside of the landlord’s policy on response times. The landlord’s own policy says that it will ask residents how often they would like an update as it is important that residents do not feel that it has ignored the issue. However, as no plan of action was agreed, the resident was unaware of how often she should expect an update or the responsibilities that she had in communicating with the landlord to report issues effectively. This led to the resident feeling ignored and frustrated with the landlord’s actions.
The resident raised a second formal complaint on 25 July 2023 which highlighted the lack of response to her email and that the ASB was ongoing. The landlord issued its stage 1 complaint response on 25 July 2023. The complaint response stated that its actions related to the ASB were reasonable and that it had agreed to move the neighbour out of the property which it hoped would resolve the ASB. However, the landlord said that it would take 2 to 3 months for the transfer of the neighbour to occur. While moving the neighbour showed a positive intent from the landlord to resolve the ASB, there was no plan or action agreed on how to help the resident before the neighbour moved out. As a victim of ASB the resident was left distressed as she was expected to deal with the neighbour for a further 2 to 3 without any plan as to how the landlord would deal with the ASB in the short term.
Between 3 August 2023 and 13 October 2023, the resident contacted the landlord 5 times to report a further 10 different incidents of ASB. During this period the landlord responded promptly to the resident and spoke with the neighbour about the allegations to remind the neighbour of their responsibilities relating to noise nuisance. The actions of the landlord during this period were in line with its ASB policy. However, it was apparent that the landlord was relying on the neighbour moving out of the property rather than taking further steps to create an action plan or properly risk assess the matter. The neighbour moved out of the property on 20 October 2023 which ended the ASB perpetrated by this neighbour.
The Ombudsman understands that ASB cases are often challenging as options available or chosen by a landlord to resolve a case may not be the resident’s preferred outcome. It can become difficult to manage expectations, especially in cases where counter allegations are sometimes made. However, ASB case management is a crucial aspect of a landlord’s service delivery. Effective use of an ASB procedure enables the landlord to identify appropriate steps to resolve potential areas of conflict and improve the experience of its residents.
In this case, the landlord failed to carry out and update any risk assessments in line with its ASB policy. There was also no action plan agreed with the resident at the outset of the reports as set out in its ASB policy. Had there been, the landlord could have used this to monitor the case and set up a reasonable communication plan with the resident. An action plan can be an effective tool to manage ASB for both the landlord and the resident. This would have allowed the landlord to be clear on what actions it can take, and the timescales involved in such actions. Taking all the circumstances into account, this amounts to maladministration.
The failings identified had a significant adverse effect on the resident. She was left frustrated, distressed and felt unsupported by the landlord’s service. The Ombudsman’s guide on remedies says that where maladministration has occurred which had a significant impact on the resident a payment of compensation between £600 and £1,000 is appropriate. Given the lack of a risk assessment, action plan and the inconsistent communication a payment of £750 is a fair and reasonable remedy. The payment of £750 is in addition to the £25 it offered the resident at stage 2 of its complaint process for its poor communication.

Complaint handling

The landlord handles complaints in 2 stages. Stage 1 responses will be issued within 10 working days, and stage 2 responses within 20 working days. In exceptional cases, this period can be extended by an additional 10 days for good reason. The landlord will notify the resident of any extension, the reason for it, and ask for the resident’s agreement.
The landlord responded to the resident’s first complaint at stage 1 after 21 workings days, and stage 2 after 19 working days. Stage 1 was issued outside of the landlord’s policy timescales and the landlord did not contact the resident to request an extension. This was a short delay, but one that doubled the length of time the resident had to wait for a response. This caused the resident some frustration.
The landlord responded to the resident’s second complaint at stage 1 after 8 working days, and stage 2 after 36 working days. While the landlord did request an extension of time to respond to the complaint at stage 2, it did so after the timescale to respond had already passed. The extension agreed for a response by 5 October 2023, was also missed. This delay caused further frustration and distress to the resident at an already distressing time. Taking all the circumstances into account, this amounts to service failure.
As part of its stage 2 response the landlord offered £25 for the delay in providing its stage 2 response. The landlord does have a compensation policy. However, this policy does not give guidance on any discretionary compensation where residents have suffered distress and inconvenience. While it is positive the landlord recognised the delay in its complaint handling and offered compensation, the amount is below this Service’s guidance on remedies.
This Service’s guidance says that where there has been a service failure that caused some impact but did not have an effect on the overall outcome for the resident, a payment of compensation between £50 and £100 is appropriate. Therefore, a payment of £50 is a fair remedy given the delay in responding to the resident’s complaint even after the landlord had agreed to extend its timescale, this is in addition to the £25 already offered.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the residents reports of ASB.
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme, there was service failure in the landlord’s handling of the resident’s complaint.

Orders

Within 4 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to:
1. Provide a written apology to the resident for the failings identified in this report and send a copy of the apology to this Service.
2. Pay £800 compensation (in addition to the £50 it already offered) to the resident and provide this Service with evidence that the payment has been made. The compensation is broken down as:
  1. £750 for the handling of ASB.
  2. £50 for the handling of the resident’s complaint.
Within 6 weeks of the date of this report the landlord is ordered to review its offer of training for staff involved in the handling of ASB and remind ASB staff of the importance of completing risk assessments and agreeing effective action plans. The landlord will provide evidence of its review and any actions it intends to take to this Service.