London Borough of Haringey (21 006 342)

Category : Other Categories > Other

Decision : Not upheld

Decision date : 01 Mar 2022

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council handled an anti-social behaviour case. We have seen evidence the Council investigated and took appropriate action. It was not at fault when it investigated anti-social behaviour reports about Mr X. We have completed our investigation.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complained the Council failed to take appropriate action after he complained about anti-social behaviour (ASB). He said the Council treated him unfairly by threatening to take enforcement action against him and by restricting his contact with the Council. He also said it delayed in its response to his concerns.
  2. Mr X said the Council’s actions affected his mental health and wellbeing. He said he had to leave his tenancy for his own safety and protection.
  3. Mr X wants the Council to apologise for how it has dealt with his complaints and financially remedy him for the distress caused.

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. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
  2. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered Mr X’s complaint and spoke to him about it.
  2. I considered the Council’s response to Mr X and to our enquiries.
  3. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I have considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Policies and legislation

Community Trigger.

  1. The Community Trigger process enables victims of ASB, to request a review of their case where persistently reported problems have not been addressed.
  2. The process is designed to make sure that no one suffering the effects of ASB falls through the net and that agencies come together to take a joined up, problem solving approach to find a solution.
  3. The policy states that residents can use the Community Trigger if:
    • They have reported ASB to the Council, police and/or registered housing provider three times in the last six months; and
    • No action has been taken; and
    • Their case has been closed (if it is still open they must wait for the outcome)
  4. Once a resident has asked for a Community Trigger, the Council will assess their application to decide whether or not the threshold has been met.
  5. If the threshold is not met: the Council will write to the resident advising them why and alternative action you can take.

Managing unreasonable behaviour

  1. The Council has a policy for managing unreasonable or unacceptable behaviour. It explains the Council might take proportionate action to limit certain customers’ contact with the Council. The policy defines what is meant by unreasonable and unacceptable behaviour. It goes on to explain what the Council considers before taking action under the policy and sets out the options. Restricting the contact, a customer can have with the Council is one of the options.

What happened

Anti-social behaviour reports

  1. Mr X contacted the Council about anti-social behaviour near his property. The incidents were centred round a shared driveway and a plot of Council-owned land. He said people were using drugs and urinating there.
  2. Mr X said he chased the Council for a response and made further ASB reports.
  3. The Council spoke to Mr X and his neighbours. Both parties shared evidence with the Council and the Council spoke with the police about the matter.
  4. The Council concluded there was no evidence of the level of ASB Mr X alleged. The Council advised Mr X that no further action would be taken, and the matter was closed.
  5. Mr X made further reports of ASB specifically about the use of the shared driveway. Mr X began obstructing the driveway with bins and branches. The Council visited the site and spoke to Mr X and his neighbours. The Council advised Mr X he could not block the driveway. It also wrote to Mr X’s neighbour to advise what the driveway could be used for.
  6. The Council attempted to resolve the matter in the long term by installing a fence and gate to restrict access to the land and to mark out boundaries.
  7. Over the summer, Mr X contacted the Council numerous times about his neighbours’ behaviour. Initially this was the noise of children in their garden, which Mr X then filmed (presumably to collect evidence to show the Council). This led to the neighbours becoming aggressive towards Mr X. Mr X said he felt his life was threatened. The Council responded but did not treat Mr X’s report as urgent.
  8. The police were involved with the neighbour dispute.

Community Trigger

  1. Mr X requested a community trigger. He reported incidents of abuse, threats, intimidation, illegal parking and the perpetrators abusing Council-owned land and blocking the right of way.
  2. The Council advised Mr X because the matters were open and investigations were ongoing, the reports did not meet the threshold for action.

Mr X’s ASB

  1. The Council said that neighbours reported that Mr X was displaying serious antisocial behaviour. This included harassment, filming children, blocking access to residents who have a right of way.
  2. The Council spoke to neighbours and confirmed officers had witnessed Mr X’s ASB.
  3. Mr X made allegations against Council officers and wrote abusive letters to them.
  4. The Council said it advised Mr X it would not be enforcing against those who he alleged were obstructing the driveway. The Council also advised him it was exploring other legal remedies regarding his behaviour and ongoing ASB.

Unreasonable behaviour

  1. Mr X repeatedly contacted the Council. He made complaints about several officers and alleged they were lying and corrupt. The Council said it did not restrict Mr X’s contact with the Council. It issued him with a warning that restrictions may be imposed if he continued to act unreasonably.

Update

  1. Mr X vacated the property and the area in September 2021. The Council said there was no longer a need to pursue legal action. It said the Council received no further reports and believe Mr X no longer resides in the Borough.

Analysis

  1. The Council investigated Mr X’s reports of ASB. The Council spoke to the neighbours and took action by writing to Mr X’s neighbour regarding the use of the shared driveway. I consider the Council’s actions to have been proportionate and reasonable at this stage.
  2. The frequency and seriousness of incidents between Mr X and his neighbours escalated during summer 2021. At the same time, Mr X became increasingly frustrated with the Council, believing it was not taking the necessary action. This led to Mr X repeatedly contacting the Council and making allegations against Council officers.
  3. While I understand Mr X’s frustration, I see no evidence of fault by the Council. It acted in accordance with the community trigger policy as the case was open, it did not meet the threshold. Mr X’s behaviour meant the Council was not at fault for investigating and warning it would take action against him.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. I have completed my investigation. There is no fault with the Council’s actions in the way it handled Mr X’s anti-social behaviour complaint.

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