Section: Antisocial Behaviour

Council Condemned for Abuse of Power

Manchester City Council - dubbed the ASBO capital of Britain - issued a woman with an anti-social behaviour order (ASBO) without taking steps to check the truth of the allegations made against her.

In his report, Local Government Ombudsman Jerry White finds that the Council never put the allegations to Mrs X, interviewed her, or tried to gather corroborative evidence. He says, "this was an abuse of power of nightmarish proportions," and adds, "this should never be allowed to happen again."

The woman, called Mrs X in the report, had lived in her street for over 30 years. The Council imposed the order after Miss A, who had recently moved into the house opposite, complained to the Council about Mrs X. Miss A alleged that there had been verbal abuse, intimidation, loud music, threats of violence, and offensive gestures.

Miss A was told to keep a diary detailing the alleged behaviour, and the Council decided the reports were convincing without seeking corroborating evidence. The Council failed to put the allegations to Mrs X, and did not make reasonable enquiries, which would have cast doubt on the veracity of the complaints.

Mrs X was only made aware of the allegations when she was served court papers for a hearing in December 2004, which led to an interim ASBO being granted.

At a court hearing on 1 February 2005, Mrs X produced 22 letters from neighbours testifying to her good character. She applied for the interim ASBO to be discharged. Finally, on 16 May 2005, the case was withdrawn.

Mrs X says she feels stigmatised by the ASBO despite it being ultimately withdrawn, that her health has been affected, and she now takes anti-depressants.

The Ombudsman recommended that the Council pay Mrs X £2,000 compensation, offer her a meeting with a senior officer to discuss her complaint, and review its practice and procedures.

The Ombudsman said the injustice to Mrs X is considerable: "The Council's grudging acceptance that she should receive some sort of redress has come far too late and rubbed salt in the wound."

Local Government Ombudsman Report 06/B/01231

Case Law Update

Following a complaint from one of its tenants that the defendant (her brother) had assaulted her, the claimant landlord obtained an Antisocial Behaviour Injunction with a power of arrest, preventing the defendant from causing nuisance or annoyance to his sister, his mother (who was also a tenant), and other tenants.

The injunction also forbade the defendant from visiting the sister or mother or entering the area where they lived.

The defendant was later invited to stay with his sister, which he did, and then with his mother, which he did. The landlord applied to commit for contempt and the Judge imposed a 28 day suspended sentence.

The defendant then accepted a second invitation to stay with his mother. A Judge then activated the suspended sentence and added a further 28 days.

The defendant appealed, contending that the contempt had been "waived" by his mother and sister.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The Injunction had been granted for wider public protection and breach could not be waived by the two relatives. The evidence was that the neighbours had been adversely affected by the defendant's presence.

Accent Foundation Ltd v Lee [2007] All ER (D) 143 (June), 14 June 2007

New Regulations

Source: Office of Public Sector Information

The Local Authorities (Contracting Out of Antisocial Behaviour Order Functions) (England) Order 2007 SI 1441

Section 1F of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 provides that the Secretary of State may make an order permitting a local authority to enter into arrangements whereby another person is able to exercise the local authority's powers relating to Antisocial Behaviour Orders under sections 1 to 1E of the Act.

Article 2 allows a local authority to enter into such arrangements with a person ("housing manager") with whom it has already entered into an agreement under section 27 of the Housing Act 1985 to manage houses, or land held for related purposes, for that local authority.

Article 3 makes provision for conditions to which arrangements must or may be subject.

Article 4 applies the provisions of section 223 of the Local Government Act 1972, which allows authorised employees of a local authority to prosecute or defend proceedings in a Magistrates Court, to the housing manager and its employees.

Section: Antisocial Behaviour

Council Condemned for Abuse of Power

Case Law Update

New Regulations

Housing Monthly Diary

Reporting on May-July 2007

Quick Links

Welcome to the Legal Update

Archive Issues Reporting Periods