When the Complainant’s father died the Complainant requested that he be allowed to succeed to the tenancy, with his sister and her child transferring to the property and becoming joint tenants. The Landlord initially refused to allow the Complainant to succeed to the property...

The Complainant complained to the Housing Ombudsman Service that the Landlord (a) had unfairly evicted her from her home, and (b) removed and destroyed her personal belongings.

The Complainants complained that as one of them was disabled the Landlord was wrong to have removed the designated parking for residents and inadequately consulted with residents on this issue.

The Complainant is deceased and this complaint is brought by her son who complains that (a) the Landlord inappropriately served a Notice of Seeking Possession (NOSP) on his mother, and (b) it failed to assist his mother to access alternative accommodation.

The Landlord operated a shared housing scheme which aimed to assist young people with the responsibilities of managing a tenancy, with a view to the tenant ultimately being able to live independently in their own self contained accommodation. The tenancy agreement provided that the Landlord could terminate the tenancy at any time after the expiry of six months and it was intended that young people would be accommodated in the scheme for 18 months to 2 years and then referred elsewhere for permanent accommodation. The Landlord’s policies provided, however, that a tenant would not be referred for permanent accommodation if they had been served with a Notice of Seeking Possession or had rent arrears.

The Landlord suspected that the Complainant was no longer residing at his home and began to investigate. On 9 August 2005 one of its housing officers attended the property and left a calling card for the Complainant. On 15 August 2005 the housing officer sent a letter to the Complainant at his home informing him that she had concerns about his tenancy and wanted to discuss them with him.

The tenant complained that his landlord was guilty of harassment against him in respect of the manner in which it handled complaints of anti-social behaviour made against him and his family.