Ombudsman report on noise complaints alleges ‘fundamental unfairness’ in landlords complaint handling
The Housing Ombudsman has conducted a systematic investigation into noise complaints which has found that the social housing sector’s approach sees most of the issues treated as anti-social behaviour (ASB), even when they concern general household noise, making it harder for landlords to make "consistent and reasonable decisions".
A special report from the Ombudsman, Spotlight on noise complaints: Time to be heard, calls for the sector’s response to noise nuisance to be strengthened.
The spotlight report brings together learning from a review of more than 800 noise-related cases dealt with over three years together with insight from 374 responses to a call for evidence, plus interviews with front line staff and residents of some individual landlords.
It also includes tables of landlords where most noise complaints were handled by the Ombudsman during 2021-22.
The report states that between 1 April 2021 and 31 March 2022, the Ombudsman determined 181 cases with a noise complaint on the case across 96 landlords. Of those 181 cases, it found maladministration in 78 cases.
Furthermore, it notes that the maladministration rate for non-statutory noise complaints was high at 62% in 2021-22 compared to the rate across all noise cases at 43%.
Some of the key data from the Ombudsman's call for evidence, which received 374 responses comprising of 265 from residents, 87 from landlords and 22 from environmental health (EH) specialists included:
- 206 of the resident respondents had reported at least one noise issue to their landlord.
- Only 70 (34%) of the 206 residents who had made a noise report said that they had been asked to use the Noise app (a digital application available for smartphones and tablets) and 132 (64%) said that they had been asked to use diary sheets.
- 89% of the residents who had reported noise said that they were subsequently dissatisfied with the landlord’s response to their reports and of those 179 dissatisfied residents, 72 (40%) went on to make a complaint about the handling of their noise report.
In relation to policies and prevention, of the 87 landlords who responded, 66 (76%) of them handle every noise report under their ASB policy. Of the 21 landlords who did not do that, 15 of them had a separate, specific policy on noise reports.
The Ombudsman concluded that treating the noise as something it is not is unfair for both the complainant and the complained about. It is also harder for the landlord to make reasonable decisions if it does not have the right framework for all types of noise reports.
The investigation identified some good practice from landlords, such as information leaflets given to new residents explaining the common trigger points for neighbour disagreement.
The report alsomade 32 recommendations including:
- A call for the Decent Homes standard to be revised to fully reflect the causes that can result in residents experiencing noise nuisance. "By focusing exclusively on external noise, and primarily noise from vehicles or factories, it does not reflect modern living for most residents."
- Updating void standards to ensure that carpets are not removed unless in poor condition and hard flooring is removed when there have been reports of noise linked to the property, that properties have adequate insulation from transference noise and anti-vibration mats are fitted into the washing machine space as standard.
- Adopting a proactive good neighbourhood management policy, distinct to the ASB policy, with clear options for maintaining good neighbourhood relationships, such as mediation and information sharing, and reviewing the presence of staff on estates.
- Adopting a triage methodology to identify if a noise report should be handled under the ASB policy or the neighbourhood management policy, and reviewing ASB policies to ensure they are realistic and practicable.
- Ensuring that residents who make noise reports are given information about their right to make a complaint if they are dissatisfied with the landlord’s proposal for handling the situation or the actions taken to address the situation.
Richard Blakeway, Housing Ombudsman, said: “Noise is a significant driver of complaints after repairs, and it costs. It costs individuals their mental health and well-being and it costs landlords in protracted and often futile interventions, multi-agency liaison and staff morale. These costs are underestimated and may be avoidable, to some extent, by adopting the different approaches set out in this report.
“The unintentional offence caused by describing the noise as ‘low level’ because it is seen through the prism of ASB – when it is causing distress to the resident – could be avoided, as would residents completing countless diary sheets to no avail.
“We recognise that landlords are under increasing financial pressure and the role of sound insulation should be considered as part of wider strategies. Few of our recommendations present a significant cost. Rather, our practical recommendations could be cost effective, as well as providing better outcomes.
“Landlords should consider the extent to which they can adopt them and what meaning this will bring for their residents.”
Lottie Winson
