Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (06B07051)
Antisocial behaviour Maladministration causing injustice
10 September 2007
The complaint
Mr and Mrs B complained that the Council had failed to deal effectively with antisocial behaviour from two households in their street for over three years.
The council’s policies
The Council had a policy and procedure for dealing with antisocial behaviour that included mediation, where appropriate, and the facility to take possession proceedings against a tenant if someone connected to the property committed an arrestable offence in the property’s locality.
The Council could also take legal action to seek to demote a tenancy (effectively to remove a tenant’s right to security of tenure) or end a tenancy if a tenant breached the terms of the tenancy agreement.
What happened – May 2004 to November 2005
Mr and Mrs B made a number of reports of antisocial behaviour between May 2004 and September 2005. In September 2005 the matter was referred by the Council to a local mediation service which reported that the parties involved had agreed to address their differences directly with one another in future to prevent problems recurring.
In November 2005 Mr and Mrs B told the council they had experienced several days of verbal abuse from the two households and that visitors to those households were parking vehicles across the entrance to their driveway. When the Council investigated, counter-allegations were made by one of the other households. The police were involved and gave advice to all the parties.
The Ombudsman concluded that, while the Council could have taken more decisive action in May/June 2004, and November 2005 – in the latter case by following up advice given in writing to all parties – he could not reasonably conclude that any failure at that time led directly to the situation worsening.
What happened – July 2006 onwards
In early July 2006 one of Mr and Mrs B’s neighbours damaged their garden wall and gates (one of which he put through their car window, causing further damage) and kicked their porch. The police were called and the Council informed. The Council wrote to the neighbour reminding him of the terms of the tenancy agreement. The neighbour pled guilty to causing criminal damage and received a conditional discharge in August 2006.
In response to enquiries made by the Ombudsman’s investigator, the Council said it had not learned of the outcome of the court case until 28 March 2007, implying that by this time it was too late to do anything. This was untrue. There followed, from August 2006 onwards, a number of reports of comparatively low levels of antisocial behaviour from Mr and Mrs B against their neighbours.
The Ombudsman’s view
The Ombudsman was critical of the Council for failing to follow up the information it had about the criminal behaviour, particularly in the light of its requirement that serious incidents of antisocial behaviour should be dealt with promptly. He was also critical of the Council for providing inaccurate and misleading information to him about when it knew of the outcome of the court case.
Recommended remedy
The Council:
- paid Mr and Mrs B £750;
- arranged a meeting with Mr and Mrs B to discuss the way forward, and clearly explain what the Council could and could not do in terms of dealing with antisocial behaviour; and
- ensured that its own staff and the ALMO’s staff were aware of the relevant procedural requirements for dealing with complaints of antisocial behaviour.
Date Updated: 13/01/09