London Borough of Havering (25 008 566)

Category : Environment and regulation > Antisocial behaviour

Decision : Not upheld

Decision date : 20 Mar 2026

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: There was no fault by the Council, in this complaint about anti-social behaviour. This is because the complainant had not made a substantive report about anti-social behaviour before submitting a formal complaint.

The complaint

  1. I will refer to the complainant as Mrs N.
  2. Mrs N complains about anti-social behaviour by a person with mental health needs who lives near her. She says she is concerned about the safety of her children.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and s34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered evidence provided by Mrs N and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
  2. I also shared a draft copy of this decision with each party for their comments.

Back to top

What I found

  1. In July 2025, Mrs N submitted a stage 1 complaint to the Council. She said it had accommodated a person with mental health needs at a property near her home, and they were engaging in anti-social behaviour which she felt was a threat to the safety of her children. Mrs N said the Council should move the person to alternative accommodation.
  2. The Council replied to say it would not accept a complaint from Mrs N, but had instead passed her concerns to “an appropriate service”.
  3. Mrs N then referred her complaint to us.

Back to top

Analysis

  1. When someone reports anti-social behaviour to a council, the council should assess the report and consider whether it is appropriate to use any of its various powers to tackle the anti-social behaviour. If a person is dissatisfied with the council’s response, they may then make a complaint about it, and potentially bring it to the Ombudsman if they wish to continue pursuing it.
  2. In this case, however, Mrs N had not made a prior report of anti-social behaviour to the Council before making a stage 1 complaint. The Council therefore rejected her complaint, as there was nothing for a complaint investigation to consider at that point.
  3. I will add there is additional relevant information the Council has shared with us, but which I am unable to disclose for reasons of data protection. Taking these points together though, I am satisfied there was no fault by the Council here.
  4. It is unclear whether there have been any further developments since Mrs N submitted her complaint, but these would post-date her complaint and are therefore not something we can investigate. If Mrs N wishes the Council to intervene in the anti-social behaviour matter, she will need to make a substantive report about it first, before using the complaints process.

Back to top

Decision

  1. I find no fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings