Section: Antisocial Behaviour & Nuisance
Council's Failure to Deal with Antisocial Behaviour
Local Government Ombudsman Jerry White issued a report on his investigation of a complaint, about neighbour nuisance, made against Peterborough City Council.
Mr and Mrs C (owner occupiers) complained about the Council's response to reports of antisocial behaviour perpetrated by Mr and Mrs C's neighbours (council tenants). In particular, they complained about:
The decision by the Council to withdraw possession action took place whilst Mr and Mrs C pursued an application to purchase their property under the Right to Buy scheme, which later completed. The neighbours were subsequently convicted of the criminal offence of harassment.
The Ombudsman's report finds that:
- The Council should have done more to establish the nature and extent of the nuisance, and the Council's decision to withdraw possession proceedings failed to take into account all of the available evidence.
- The subsequent conviction of Mr and Mrs C's neighbours casts doubt on the Council's judgement that possession action would have been unsuccessful. The complainants, therefore, have a justifiable sense of outrage over the Council's actions.
The Ombudsman found maladministration causing injustice. The Council agreed to apologise to the complainants and pay them £2,000 compensation. The Ombudsman deemed this action satisfactory remedy.
Report No. 04/B/2615
ASB In Brief
-
Westminster Council was reported to be taking estate surveillance a step further by introducing both cameras and listening technology on its Churchill Estate and Lisson Grove Estate. Sound equipment will monitor continuously, and unusually high levels of noise will trigger camera recording.
The Council is considering using taped evidence in support of its actions, in antisocial behaviour cases.
The Northern Ireland Housing Executive secured its first interim ASBO when it took action against a man in South Belfast. The Order bans the man from using threatening behaviour, and from playing loud music.
A County Court ruling, which effectively prevented Kensington Housing Trust from taking action against a tenant alleged to have made racially abusive remarks, was overturned by the High Court. Whilst the County Court refused an injunction, the subsequent High Court ruling gave the Trust the right to make a fresh application for an Injunction.
Clause 3.7 of the Trust's tenancy agreement states a tenant must not perpetrate racial or other forms of harassment, "which may interfere with the peace and comfort of, or causes offence to any other tenant, members of his/her household, visitors or neighbours or any employee, agent or contractor acting on behalf of [the landlord] or any person engaged in lawful activity in the locality of the premises." Clause 3.6 also states tenants should not cause nuisance or annoyance.
The High Court decided that the tenant's behaviour, which included alleged offensive remarks at a public meeting and in correspondence, was capable of amounting to a breach of the tenancy agreement.
-
The ODPM started work on a consultation paper about whether councils should be allowed to contract out ASBO powers to an organisation managing its housing stock.
The changes, if introduced, will allow arms-length management organisations to apply for Antisocial Behaviour Orders in their own right. The changes could also lead to similar powers being offered to other organisations, including those in the private sector responsible for the management of social housing.
© Copyright 1996 - 2008 UK Housing Ltd. Housing Monthly Diary
Issue: September 2005 Reporting on May-August 2005
- Antisocial Behaviour & Nuisance
- Community Care
- Heating & Energy Efficiency
- Homelessness & Asylum Seekers
- Housing Benefits
- Housing Finance
- Housing Legislation
- Housing Management
- Housing Ombudsman
- Ministerial Update
- Right to Buy
- Security of Tenure
- Travellers and Gypsies
Quick Links
Welcome to the Legal Update
