Housing association fails in appeal over ruling it harassed tenants

Social landlord Metropolitan Housing Trust has failed to convince the Court of Appeal to overturn a finding that it unlawfully harassed two tenants.

The judges found Nottingham County Court had been right to make the finding in the cases of Colin Worthington and Lynda Parkin, who lived in Metropolitan properties in Chesterfield.

The dispute went back to 2007, when both raised concerns about anti-social behaviour in their area.

Ms Parkin installed CCTV cameras on her home - with Metropolitan’s consent - while Mr Worthington “had formed what he described as the Arkwright Town Residents Group of which he was the self-appointed chair”, the judge said.

He took photographs in the area intended to show anti-social behaviour and published these on a website which “generated a considerable amount of hostility from their neighbours”, with complaints to Metropolitan that Ms Parkin's CCTV recordings were causing a nuisance and both she and Mr Worthington were taking inappropriate photographs of other residents.

After a lengthy dispute, Metropolitan served notices to seek possession in 2007, despite the move being questioned by Richard Hewgill, chair of Metropolitan’s compliance committee.

The county court said both letters seeking possession contained serious inaccuracies and found for the two residents in 2016.

In Worthington & Anor v Metropolitan Housing Trust Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 1125 Kitchin LJ dismissed Metropolitan’s two grounds of appeal, that the county court judge erred in law in making a finding of harassment against it, and also erred in his conclusion that Metropolitan’s actions were not reasonable.

The judge said the harassment “took the form of correspondence over a period of time between [Metropolitan] and Mr Worthington and Ms Parkin”.

He found the judge in the county court had “expressly directed himself that he had to consider whether or not the conduct complained of crossed the boundary between that which was unattractive and even unreasonable, and that which was oppressive and unacceptable”.

Mark Smulian