All Case Studies

Noise Nuisance (June 2023)

Ms K has been reporting ASB reports of excessive noise from a neighbouring property, which they found difficult to cope with and was clearly causing anxiety.

We advised Ms K that a notice to quit (NTQ) had been served on the tenants above. This was issued by the leaseholder of the property and not by us. We asked our leaseholder to provide us with updates on the eviction process and advised Ms K that she’ll be kept updated. There are sensitivities surrounding this case with the neighbouring property.

We explained to Ms K that there would be delays in resolving the matter as there’s been a ban on evictions since the start of the pandemic but was assured by the leaseholder that they are currently doing what they can to move the matter forward.

Ms K was not satisfied, as this matter started to become very difficult. We informed Ms K that they were not able to take further action against the leaseholder or the family at the time, as they were working with us to take steps to remedy the situation. Ms K was not happy with the outcome and escalated her complaint to be reviewed by a panel.

Our panel acknowledged that Ms K reported noise to our ASB Team on many occasions and acknowledged that noise has been particularly difficult to cope with during recent periods of national lockdown. The panel also felt the quality of communication by our ASB Team should have been more proactive and consistent.

The panel agreed with Ms K that we could reasonably have acted more quickly, and that engagement with the leaseholder should have been more resolute, however made it clear to Ms K that it will still take some time for a permanent resolution. This is because the family (LH Sub-tenants) had to find suitable alternative accommodation. This is made more difficult as a result the pandemic. Our panel awarded compensation in line with our Customer Care Policy for the delays that occurred and for not communicating more effectively.

Ms K was not satisfied with the outcome and escalated her complaint to the Housing Ombudsman Service (HOS).

Outcome

• Maladministration in Poplar HARCA’s handling of the resident’s reports of noise nuisance and anti-social behaviour (ASB) from neighbouring flats
• Maladministration in the Poplar HARCA’s complaint handling

HOS ordered Poplar HARCA to engage with professionals to discuss the quickest and most appropriate way forward in resolving complaints. Poplar HARCA to proactively advocate for its resident, recognising the unreasonable and substantial interference with the enjoyment of the resident’s home this complaint has caused. The HOS has ordered Poplar HARCA to pay Ms K a higher compensation award for the distress and inconvenience caused.