Hundreds of cases of bad behaviour by nightmare neighbours are blighting the lives of council tenants, prompting councillors to take a closer look at the problem.
Brighton and Hove City Council’s People Overview and Scrutiny Committee is being asked to set up a “task and finish” group to scrutinise the issue of anti-social behaviour (ASB) in social housing.
A report to the committee said that 675 new anti-social behaviour cases were reported in 2023-24 alone.
Figures released in the council’s housing performance report for 2024-25, presented to council housing management panels last month, said that a further 785 cases were reported last year.
The council lets more than 12,000 houses and flats and, in each of the past two years, three people were evicted as a result of anti-social behaviour.
The report said: “This shows that the majority of council tenants in Brighton and Hove are good tenants who follow their tenancy agreements and do not conduct anti-social behaviour.
“A small number of tenants do conduct anti-social and other criminal behaviour that affects the lives of their immediate neighbours and the wider community.
“The figure above may be under-reported as residents may report issues directly to the police without informing the council.
“This anti-social behaviour can be especially distressing when it is directed at particular individuals, is conducted over a prolonged period or when it involves hate incidents.”
The Local Democracy Reporting Service has covered several cases of anti-social behaviour affecting council tenants in Hollingdean, Craven Vale, Kemp Town and the North Laine in the past five years.
Craven Vale residents complained over several months about a nightmare neighbour, Alex Holmgren, who was placed in a flat there by the council.
He broke into neigbhours’ homes, threatened people with a knife and even a firearm over several months in 2022 before he was arrested and later dealt with by the courts.
Last month, Hollingdean Residents’ Association again told a council housing management panel about rogue bikers racing around streets on the estate.
More than 100 complaints have been made to Sussex Police and a joint meeting has been organised between housing officials and the force.
Weary residents have been urged to keep reporting the problems to Sussex Police despite some concerns that their complaints do not appear to have been acted on.
In Craven Vale, Theobald House and Hampshire Court residents have complained about drug dealers taking over council flats.
At a Housing and New Homes Committee meeting in March last year, one resident of Theobald House, a high-rise block, described the building as “the city pharmacy” and said that families had to step over people doing drugs.
Hampshire Court rep Martin Cunningham told a housing management panel last September that he and his neighbours felt that the council “rewards” anti-social behaviour because a “prolific drug dealer” was given a secure tenancy.
In 2022, the then East Brighton ward councillor Nancy Platts asked why drug dealers were being housed near former addicts and other vulnerable tenants in Craven Vale.
After action from the council and police, dealers have either been removed or have been described by residents as “going quiet”.
The proposed task and finish group would look at council and housing association tenants even though the council cannot set policies for housing associations.
The group’s focus is expected to be
- assessing the level of anti-social behaviour in social housing in Brighton and Hove
- understanding the effects of anti-social behaviour on people’s lives
- weighing up current policies and procedures for dealing with anti-social behaviour
- exploring the policies and procedures used by other councils and housing associations which have fewer incidents of anti-social behaviour
If agreed by the committee, the task and finish group would include three Labour councillors and one Green, one Conservative and one Independent.
The group would then draw up a report with recommendations to be presented to the People Overview and Scrutiny Committee next January and then the council’s cabinet.
The People Overview and Scrutiny Committee is due to meet at Hove Town Hall at 4pm next Tuesday (8 July). The meeting is scheduled to be webcast.
Why not just enforce the requirements of consideration for other people and property that already exists within the tenancy agreement? People will behave if it means that they lose their house and won’t be eligible for help. No need for expensive committees and reports!
It looks like, from the wording, that while councils can act on certain issues directly such as noise where they have legislative powers, and the police should act on criminal activity, the article mentions that housing associations set their own rules for most issues, and that these appear to have gaps or are not enforced by them. Another flaw introduced by a privatised system: the complaints are directed to councils, but the private housing associations can ignore their concerns if it will cost them money, knowing that ‘the council’ will get the blame.
I am currently dealing with an anti social neighbour in a housing association flat.
The council can deal with ASB with owner occupiers, council tenants and private renters. However, they can’t deal with ASB in housing association properties.
Yes they can, it’s in the tenancy agreements, all of them.
This is just one complaint that the housing ombudsman look at for Brighton and Hove city council you can find them online.
The complaint is about the Brighton and Hove city council response to tenants
a. Reports of antisocial behaviour (ASB).
b. Reports of discrimination, including a failure to make reasonable
adjustments.
c. Concerns about communal cleaning.
d. Associated complaint.
Determination
In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme there was
maladministration by the landlord in respect of its response to the tenants
a. Reports of ASB.
b. Reports of discrimination, including a failure to make reasonable
adjustments.
c. Concerns about the communal cleaning.
d. Associated complaint.
Recommendations
We recommend Brighton and Hove city council takes the action to introduce the following:
c. A vulnerability policy and/or strategy. In line with our Spotlight report on
Attitude, Respect and Rights these should be co-produced with residents,
and consider any future good practice guidance published by the
Ombudsman, following engagement and consultation.
d. A reasonable adjustments policy.
As far as I can see this has not been dun this was from 2024 so with is the problem it is officers at the top not enforcing how officers are meant to work at Brighton and Hove city council and instead go against the housing ombudsman’s rulings still.
Well as one of the resident in Cravenvale I can say we fought with the Council for months and they did NOTHNG!! IN the end Sussex Police took the lead and actually pushed through one of the closure orders. The was that the Council couldn’t even get this right and they actually botched the paperwork for the repossession order even after the Police did the closure order for them and it had to be redone!!
At a public meeting we had to inform the senior managers what the legislation said and give them a copy of the actual legislation they were clueless, like a deer in head lights! It was like we were talking a foreign language and these were the senior managers who incidentally have been promoted to even more senior positions recently and yes paid more of tax payers money when they are being educated on the law by the every tenants!
he law is very clear about ASB and was even changed to make it easier to evict tenants that makes others lives a misery. Yet what followed after we “embarrassed and humiliated” these individuals was even more shocking ‘
We became a target and the very council our landlord started a relentless campaign against us with the very Leader of the Council, Bella Sankey and the housing officers taking every opportunity to unleash a sustained programme of “revenge punishment” . This has continued even after the Housing Ombudsman ruling “Maladministration and the landlord failure to show due regard to its responsibilities under the Equality Act”! The latest move in April of this year was that the Monitoring officer for the council has sanctioned us and we have been banned from complaining to the council and have to use a dedicated email address which the landlord is not monitoring and any emails to anyone or anything outside of this email address is simply ignored!
Even the new Chief Executive Jess Gibbons is embroiled in this and seems happy to watch her officers behave in a manner that isn’t just unlawful but breaches the very policies and procedures under our tenancies.
So we have again had to turn to the regulators to get the landlord to deal with the outstanding complaints and also looking at a lawsuit which will all cost the tax payer in the end!
YOUR ISSUE WITH THIS COUNCIL IS THE OFFICERS THEY NEED TO GO FOR REAL CHANGE TO TAKE PLACE, SIMPLY PROMOTING THE ROTTEN APPLES DOES NOT SOLVE ANYTHING! IT MAKES IT WORSE AND THE STATISTICS AND VERY EVIDENCE SHOW THAT…. !
People used to say Whitehawk was bad, not mentioned here, but Kemp Town & North Laines are.
Wonder what’s going on then, people want to go to these Areas yet they seem the worse.
North street YMCA, it’s why royal mail had to gate off their front door with iron railings…
It’s sadly everywhere. The police and council need to up their game and the council need to change their threshold as to what they ‘class’ as asb. Last few months a lady friend of mine was indecently exposed at by a Hove neighbour and the police and council did absolutely nothing. B&H is becoming an undesirable place to live
Unfortunately some BHCC council officers have been found lacking, especially when I’ve been supporting residents to report ASB. The indifference is staggering.
I agree with you. I understand the legal complexities involved in dealing with ASB, but when we see almost no notices to quit or evictions issued, despite longstanding and repeated incidents involving publicly well-known individuals, it suggests a lack of resolve. Officers need to show greater legal backbone.
Given how scarce and valuable social housing is in Brighton, we should prioritise those who genuinely need it and are willing to respect the responsibilities that come with it, at least, in my opinion.
There should also be a blacklist of non desirables who have lost the right to any form of social housing, at the same time use a points/demerit system where renters are informed of any points loss because of their behaviour, or lack of, lose all your points lose your home, simple. No need to keep homes for lowlifes, give them to people who can live reasonably normal, no-one is perfect but some people should just be excluded,
Definitely!
Apart from that being illegal.
I know Benjamin, blacklisting is illegal, however minus points and warnings are not. They can block would be tenants based on previous behaviour, damage, non payment of rent, which gives the rogues a hint of what can be done. No Government agency or HA is obliged to tolerate or house the problem types who exceed their tenancy contracts previously, nor their family if they were included previously.
Eh, I’m supportive of the spirit of that. My personal feeling is that social housing is a luxury that should be lost if terms are abused, in many of these enduring cases.
However, my understanding is that councils do have a statutory duty of care under the Housing Act, and previous ASB doesn’t disqualify that duty, even for those with difficult histories. I believe housing associations may have more discretion, but even they are often contractually tied to council nominations.
Duty of care is correct but not endless, if the tenants that need extensive or different needs fulfilled then standard social housing is probably the wrong location for them to be left unsupervised to the detriment of every other family around, duty of care extends also mainly to those in need of housing and not as a dumping ground for who or who councils forget to actually take care of, it’s not a blanket “duty of care” throw them all in and let them sort it out, yes there should be early intervention with consquences or at leasr remedies
Oh, absolutely, I’ve definitely seen several properties where the incumbent was very much failing to thrive. It’s quite a broad duty, though, and that often comes up as a barrier when it’s challenged in my experience.
The problem is that the alternative isn’t there, so we get an ill-fitting solution that doesn’t really work, and one that is difficult to backtrack on. Potentially, I feel you’d need a vehicle that provides social housing, which is not a part of the council, to move forward.
There should also be a way of removing councillors and council officers if they’re not doing their jobs properly. Incompetence is an undesirable trait in any role but for some reason it seems to fester and even get rewarded in local government.
It’s called voting in local elections, incompetent people can be removed once enough evidence is available.
I had a next door neighbour who threw rubbish from their first floor window everyday for 9 months straight. The council refused to act until I provided evidence. The behaviour continued to escalate where the neighbour would scream and shout all sorts of horrible and horrific things throughout the day and night. On top of that they were urinating in the communal gardens, on their own balcony and at one point pleasuring themselves on their balcony, the behaviour became so out of control. This has been an ongoing issue for me and my fellow neighbours for years. But the time between each, has become closer and closer each time. When it first started, it was every few years, then each time it would start happening again, quicker and quicker after they returned. I gather a large amount of evidence at the request of the council. It went on and on and eventually the council looked into it, they served them ample warnings which were also disregarded and thrown out the window. Even starting eviction proceedings. After around 8 months of hell, it was then moved to the complex housing team. Within a two weeks of the complex housing teams involvement. The neighbour was taken away for psychiatric intervention. However, on the day this neighbour was taken to hospital the complex housing team contacted me to say that this neighbour would be returning when they have had treatment and are well enough to return.
I have told them, that this neighbours ASB will return when they come back. It always has. And that they would be far better suited in a place such as supported accommodation as they are clearly not well enough to maintain an independent tenancy and continually cause havoc and the cycle just repeats each time. The council even confronted the resident with all the evidence, but denied any involvement with their behaviour. Even when they presented the photos and videos of their behaviour.
It begs the question as to if these warnings and eviction proceedings they served this neighbour will be wiped clean, forgotten about and left, when they return. This shows me that the council are willing to disregard the previous incidents, evidence and police reports about this and will support this neighbour while also rewarding their ASB behaviour by allowing them to return and it’ll just be another merry go round once again for myself and fellow neighbours that it has also severely affected with the repeat of said behaviour starting again.
This neighbour clearly wasn’t bothered or put off by the previous warnings and deterrents that council gave them. But instead. Allowing this behaviour to start, escalate and become a living nightmare for everyone else around them. While the rest of us. Have to endure it and suffer. This neighbour isn’t the only resident who suffers with mental health issues. There are other residents that have both mental and physical health issues that live in the same building as the above tenant, but don’t behave in that manner. But continue to be ignored, dismissed, endure one residents behaviour and to “just get on with it”
All because the council wants to be seen to not be stepping on toes or be classed as discriminating.
But other vulnerable tenants suffer.
It’s so wrong.
It’s stories like this where the problem goes on for such a long time that it becomes ingrained behaviour. If evictions aren’t on the table, or rather, such a high threshold to reach, then early interventions, warnings, behavioural contracts, and fines really should be used early and often.
And in the Argus today,,,, a group being set up to look at,, would you believe,, Anti Social Behaviour in Social Housing, or maybe, just maybe someone in office has just realised where they all live,