Section: Antisocial Behaviour

Anti-social Behaviour Policy Guidance

A consultation exercise was launched with social landlords in England on proposed guidance for producing policies and procedures for tackling anti-social behaviour.

The consultation sought comments on how useful and usable the guidance is in helping landlords to ensure their tenants have a clear understanding of what action would be taken to deal with anti-social behaviour.

The requirement on social landlords to publish policies and procedures sits alongside a new range of powers for landlords to tackle anti-social behaviour introduced by the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003. These powers commenced on 30 June 2004. Following the consultation period, which ended in June, Statutory Guidance to be issued by the ODPM will apply to local housing authorities and Housing Action Trusts in England.

The Housing Corporation will issue Statutory Housing Management Guidance in the form of a circular for RSLs. The National Assembly for Wales will be issuing similar guidance in Wales.

Information Notes

The Antisocial Behaviour Act received royal assent on 22 November 2003. Some of the powers are in force, but Chapter 2, which relates to housing, comes into operation on 30 June in England.
The Welsh Assembly will decide on the date of commencement for Wales.
The Anti-social Behaviour, etc. (Scotland) Bill was passed by the Scottish Parliament and is expected to gain royal assent in August 2004.

Failure to Deal With Anti-social Behaviour

The Ombudsman issued a report on the investigation of a complaint, about failure to implement effective action against anti-social behaviour during the perpetrator's introductory tenancy, against Manchester City Council.

The complainant also complained that once the trial tenancy had come to an end, the Council unreasonably delayed in tackling the nuisance caused by the nuisance neighbour and the nuisance neighbour's visitors.

The Council advised the Ombudsman that it did not have evidence to evict the nuisance neighbour before the tenancy became secure.

The Ombudsman decided that, on a balance of probability, evidence of the anti-social behaviour had been submitted to the Council in time to take effective action before the introductory tenancy came to an end. The Ombudsman concluded that the Council's failure to act led to the nuisance neighbour remaining in the tenancy for a year longer than was necessary.

The Ombudsman recommended that the Council pays the complainant £500 in compensation and reviews its relevant procedures.

Report No. 02/C/17152

Failure to Deal With Racial Harassment

Ms D, a tenant of Hammersmith & Fulham LBC, had been the victim of racial harassment on the estate where she lived. She complained to the Ombudsman that the Council had failed to investigate her complaints about incidents of racial harassment and about its failure to take action against known perpetrators. She also considered that the Council had failed to make sufficient efforts to secure alternative suitable accommodation for her after she was awarded a management transfer.

The Ombudsman concluded that:

The Council failed to treat the incidents Ms D reported as racial harassment and, therefore, failed to investigate them in accordance with its racial harassment policy and procedure.
The Council did not offer support to Ms D as a victim of racial harassment and took no action against two of the perpetrators following their conviction for assault.
The Council failed to consider Ms D for offers of accommodation in her chosen area for rehousing and offered the properties to applicants with lower priority.
Ms D suffered considerable anxiety and lived in constant fear of further harassment.

The Ombudsman recommended that the Council pays Ms D compensation of £5,000, sends Ms D a letter of apology, and highlights the issues raised in this complaint in training programmes run for housing officers. The Council agreed to provide this remedy.

Report No. 03/A/2856

Neighbour Nuisance Not Dealt With

Miss G and Miss D live in a Victorian terraced street. Miss D lives in one of five units created out of the renovation of one large property where some of the units are in private ownership and others are still owned by Cambridge CC. Miss G lives in the neighbouring property.

Miss G and Miss D complained that the Council unreasonably delayed in dealing with neighbour nuisance, breaches of tenancy conditions, extreme antisocial behaviour, harassment, and drug dealing perpetrated by a council tenant in one of the units. Consequently the complainants said they lived in intolerable conditions for nearly two years, during which time they experienced daily intimidation. In addition, many friends and neighbours had left the area to escape the situation.

The Ombudsman agreed that the Council failed to deal properly with the problem and that both complainants lived in fear and discomfort for a year longer than was necessary. He recommended that the Council should pay £2,250 to each complainant in compensation, and review the way it responds to complaints of neighbour nuisance.

Report No. 02/B/13214-5

Anti-social Behaviour Initiatives

Police in Middlesborough imposed a no-go zone and curfew, following further troubles involving street battles between rival gangs of teenagers. Under the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003, an area that borders the Council's Saltersgill Estate has been declared out-of-bounds after 9pm to under 16-year olds.
High Peak Council won an Order to evict a couple and ban them from Buxton for five years, after the couple was accused of making life for neighbours a misery.

New Regulations

Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 (Commencement No. 3 and Savings) Order 2004 SI 1502 (C.61)

This Order brought into force on 30 June 2004, in relation to England, Part 2 (housing) and section 91 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003.

In Part 2:

Section 12 introduces a new duty on social landlords to prepare and publish policies on anti-social behaviour, as well as make them available to the public.
Section 13 replaces sections 152 and 153 of the Housing Act 1996 with new provisions allowing local authorities, registered social landlords, and housing action trusts to apply for Injunctions to prohibit anti-social behaviour, which relates to, or affects, their management of their stock.
Sections 14 and 15 allow social landlords to apply for Demotion Orders in cases of anti-social behaviour. The Demotion Order ends the tenant's existing secure or assured tenancy and replaces it with a new form of demoted tenancy with less security of tenure.
Section 16 amends the court's discretion when considering claims for possession of a dwelling house let on an assured or secure tenancy brought on the grounds of anti-social behaviour, to ensure that sufficient weight is given to the effects of any anti-social behaviour.
Section 17 ensures that all functions of the Secretary of State arising from the amendments to the Housing Acts mentioned are, so far as exercisable in relation to Wales, to be carried out by the National Assembly for Wales.
Schedule 1 makes provision in respect of demoted tenancies where the landlord is a local housing authority or a housing action trust.

Section 91 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 allows a local authority to request a power of arrest to be attached to any provision of an injunction obtained under section 222 of the Local Government Act 1972 where the Injunction is to prohibit anti-social behaviour.

The Secure Tenancies (Notices) (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2004 SI 1627

These Regulations amend the Secure Tenancies (Notices) Regulations 1987 as they apply in England to prescribe the form of Notice which should be served on a secure tenant before a landlord begins proceedings for a Demotion Order under section 82A of that Act.

Section 14 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 amended Part 4 of the Housing Act 1985 to allow a secure tenancy to be brought to an end and replaced with a less secure demoted tenancy by a Demotion Order made by a County Court.

Section 83 of the Housing Act 1985, as amended by section 14 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003, provides that a court may not entertain proceedings for a Demotion Order unless either a Notice in the prescribed form and containing certain specified information has been served on the secure tenant, or the court considers it just and equitable to dispense with such a Notice.

© Copyright 1996 - 2012 UK Housing Ltd.

Section: Antisocial Behaviour

Anti-social Behaviour Policy Guidance

Information Notes

Failure to Deal With Anti-social Behaviour

Failure to Deal With Racial Harassment

Neighbour Nuisance Not Dealt With

Anti-social Behaviour Initiatives

New Regulations

Legal Update

Reporting on April-June 2004

Quick Links

Welcome to the Legal Update

Archive Issues Reporting Periods