Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to take action against his neighbours whom he says are carrying out anti-social behaviour. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation. The Ombudsman cannot consider any actions which a social housing landlord may take against its tenants for breaches of tenancy conditions.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complained about the Council failing to take action against its tenants who are his neighbours and whom he says have caused anti-social behaviour for the past year. He says the Council should evict its tenants as rehousing them would only move the problem elsewhere.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)
3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered all the information which Mr X submitted with his complaint. I have also considered the Council’s response and Mr X has been given the opportunity to comment on the draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X says he has been providing evidence to the Council’s anti-social behaviour team for a year about the actions of his neighbours. He says he has received minimal response from the Council and his neighbours continue to harass him and his family who are also council tenants. He wants the Council to evict his neighbours.
6. The Council says it has taken the complaints seriously which is why it referred the matter to the ASB Team rather than dealing with them simply as a tenancy matter. It says the matter is not simple because both parties have made complaints about the other. In March 2020 the Council served a warning letter on Mr X and his neighbours about their behaviour.
7. Since that time Mr X says he has provided further CCTV evidence to the Council but no action has taken place. The Council says it was interviewing his neighbours in the month when he complained to us. It will be referring the matter to its legal advisors in due course to establish if there is sufficient evidence to warrant court proceedings.
8. It is not the Ombudsman’s role to intervene in disputes between social housing tenants. We can consider any actions a council’s ASB team may have been involved in and in this case it is clear that they have acted where they consider there is sufficient evidence.

Back to top

Final decision

9. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation. The Ombudsman cannot consider any actions which a social housing landlord may take against its tenants for breaches of tenancy conditions.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman