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

Stonewater Limited (202302280)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202302280

Stonewater Limited

18 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:
    1. Reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB).
    2. Associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the landlord and lives in a house. It is aware that the resident has physical and mental health issues.
  2. The resident contacted the landlord in 2022 and 2023 to report that her neighbours were causing ASB. Her reports included assault, verbal abuse, malicious social media posts, rubbish left outside, and intimidation and harassment.
  3. The resident complained to the landlord on 15 December 2023. She said that there was ongoing ASB from her neighbours. She had been attempting to contact the landlord to discuss the issues since November 2023 and was unhappy with its lack of communication.
  4. The landlord sent it stage 1 response on 14 May 2024. It recognised there was a service failure in its communication and apologised. It also apologised for a delay in acknowledging the resident’s complaint and offered her a total of £465 in compensation. It broke this down as:
    1.  £350 towards time, trouble and distress caused by poor communication and a failure to take action.
    2. £25 for failing to follow process by making a call to the resident.
    3. £50 for a lack of communication.
    4. £40 for a delay in acknowledging the complaint.
  5. The resident asked the landlord to escalate her complaint to stage 2 on 29 May 2023. She was unhappy with the level of redress it offered and felt its response was inaccurate. She said that the response did not address all the points that she raised.
  6. The landlord responded at stage 2 of its complaint process on 15 July 2024. It said a single point of contact had been set up for the resident, to provide clarity and reassurance. It apologised for delays in escalating her complaint and offered compensation for this. It said it had reviewed the redress at stage 1. Taking into consideration reasonable adjustments due to the resident’s health issues, it increased the total compensation offer to £1,315, broken down as:
    1. £1000 towards time, trouble and inconvenience caused.
    2. £275 for service failures.
    3. £40 for a delay in replying to the complaint.
  7. The resident brought her complaint to us as she remained unhappy with the landlord’s response. She was dissatisfied with its compensation offer.

Assessment and findings

Scope of investigation

  1. The resident told us that the landlord’s handling of the ASB issues affected her health. She believed the stress had caused her physical and mental health to worsen.
  2. 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 cause of any illness or injury. When disputes arise over the cause of an illness, oral testimony can be examined in court. The resident’s complaint that the stress of the situation had affected her physical and mental health, is better dealt with via the court.

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. 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.
  4. The landlord’s records show that it dealt with several ASB cases involving the resident between 2022 and 2023. The reports involved a number of neighbours and there were counter allegations made against her. The landlord had acted by issuing warning letters, arranging mediation and liaising with the police and the local authority. In July 2023, it closed its ASB case involving the resident, as no further issues had been reported. There is no evidence that any further reports of ASB were made to the landlord, between July 2023 and November 2023.
  5. The resident contacted the landlord on 9 November 2023 to discuss ongoing ASB. She said that since the last ASB case was closed the situation had not changed. She told the landlord that this was making her feel very vulnerable and her disability was a contributing factor to her distress.
  6. The landlord’s ASB policy states that it will adopt a ‘harm-based triage approach’ as a response to ASB. This recognises that residents experiencing challenging circumstances, such as health issues, may have a lower resilience and ability to deal with incidents of ASB. As the landlord was aware that the resident was experiencing challenges, it would have been appropriate for it to fast track its contact with her as set out in its policy. This would have led to it agreeing an action plan with her within 1 working day.
  7. Between November 2023 and May 2024, the resident contacted the landlord 8 times to report ASB and chase a response. The landlord’s records show that several departments were aware of her contact, however, did not respond. Its lack of communication and failure to follow its ASB policy likely left the resident feeling distressed and unsupported. This was a failing which it acknowledged and addressed in its subsequent complaint responses.
  8. In its stage 1 response, the landlord acknowledged and apologised for its failure to contact the resident upon her reports of ASB. It confirmed that it did not have an open ASB case in relation to her current concerns. It asked her to provide it with information so that it could decide if it was necessary to open a new case. It was unreasonable for the landlord to put the onus on the resident to provide information at this point. Given the poor communication she had faced attempting to report ASB, it would have been appropriate for the landlord to instigate contact with her and open a new ASB case in line with its policy.
  9. It was positive that the landlord’s complaint response 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 and setting up a single point of contact for the resident, to improve communication were appropriate.
  10. 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.
  11. The landlord’s stage 2 response was comprehensive and showed that it had worked to improve communication with the resident. The evidence shows that in its stage 2 investigation, it took a number of steps to ensure it fully understood the issues raised. Actions such as conducting a home visit and completing a safeguarding referral were reasonable and demonstrated it had listened to the resident’s concerns. It showed that consideration was given to reasonable adjustments in reviewing its redress. The landlord recognised the detriment its failings had caused her and showed a willingness to repair its relationship with her.
  12. 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 a revised offer of compensation of £1000 which is in line with our remedies guidance. It identified that this was for the time, trouble and inconvenience caused by its failures. It is our opinion that this offer was reasonable and along with the other steps taken, amounts to reasonable redress.
  13. Following the landlord’s stage 2 response the resident has advised this Service that the ASB issues with her neighbours are ongoing. We have made a recommendation for the landlord to contact the resident, review any current ASB cases with her and establish if opening a new case would be appropriate. If this is the case, it should agree an action plan with the resident, in line with its ASB policy.

Associated complaint

  1. The landlord has a 2-stage complaints process. It will acknowledge complaints within 5 working days and respond to stage 1 and 2 complaints within 10 and 20 working days respectively. At stage 2, if the response cannot be completed in full by the twentieth working day, the resident will be notified to inform them of the progress of their complaint and when they will expect a full response. This is in line with our Complaint Handling Code (the Code) timescales.
  2. The resident contacted the landlord to complain about its lack of communication with her on 15 December 2023. The landlord’s records show she chased a response from it 4 times between January and May 2024. However, her complaint was not raised until 8 May 2024. It was appropriate that when it did raise the complaint, the landlord included its delays in complaint handling, as part of its stage 1 investigation.
  3. The landlord acknowledged in both its stage 1 and 2 complaint responses that it had not responded within its complaint handling timescales. It apologised for its late responses and offered the resident a total of £315 compensation. It broke this down as £40 for the delay in responding and £275 for service failures.
  4. In the landlord’s explanation to us it acknowledged that its complaint handling was not appropriate. It told us that it has increased its number of complaint handlers as well as introducing new quality assurance methods. It states that it has seen a significant improvement in its complaint handling process due to the changes made.
  5. The landlord’s apology and offer of compensation was reasonable given its delayed responses. Its compensation offer was in line with our remedies guidance. We therefore find that the landlord has made a reasonable offer of redress.

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:
    1. Reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB).
    2. Associated complaint.

Orders and recommendations

Recommendations

  1. The landlord should contact the resident to undertake a review of any current ASB cases. It should determine upon its contact with her if it would be appropriate for a new case to be opened. If this is the case, it should complete an action plan in discussion with the resident to ensure that she is clear about how it intends to handle any further incidents.