Independent Working Group on Antisocial Behaviour: review report

Housing and Environment

As stated above, not all antisocial behaviour meets a criminal threshold and therefore will not be included in any Police or Justice System data. Outside Police Scotland, Local Authority Antisocial Behaviour Teams and Registered Social Landlords are often viewed as lead agencies in terms of antisocial behaviour reporting and expected response. It should be noted however that available data in this field is also not comprehensive or reliable to illustrate the complete picture of antisocial behaviour within communities.

The Housing Sector encompasses a broad range of tenures; from Social Housing, privately owned and rented properties as well as specialist providers for varying groups with particular needs. Housing, antisocial behaviour teams and landlords therefore already often have a unique close relationship with the communities in which they operate and are ideally placed to respond to community needs.

Housing professionals told the Working Group that pressures on other partners due to budget cuts and resourcing issues were having a direct impact on housing and antisocial behaviour teams, with the public contacting them instead of appropriate partners due to perceived lack of response from other agencies. This was resulting in a real shift in expectations alongside a public misunderstanding of the powers available to housing in comparison to Police Scotland, with an expectation that housing should lead on resolving criminal matters, without having the powers to do so. This in turn was impacting negatively on tenant and resident satisfaction.

Public perception of what is and what is not antisocial behaviour often differs from the practitioner approach, resulting in challenges in meeting expectations in response. It can be confusing for all to distinguish between criminality, antisocial behaviour and at the other end of the scale, inconsideration and intolerance. Continued dissatisfaction with outcomes and the perception that reporting is not worthwhile could lead to further declining confidence in all agencies and a feeling of being “passed from pillar to post”. It is not helpful to those accessing services that there appears to be differences in interpretation of the definition, different criteria to assess and triage antisocial behaviour as well as inconsistency of response.

Outcomes of complaints made to housing and antisocial behaviour teams can vary greatly, from 100% formal action taken (Warnings Issued) - Orkney Islands Council to 99.55% Advice Only (Aberdeen City); with significant variations in between including verbal and written warnings, Behaviour Contracts, Antisocial Behaviour Orders, Notice Of Possession for Recovery and Evictions, highlighting inconsistency of response (Scotland’s Housing Network, 2024). There is also a perception that small or individual landlords are not equipped at all to tackle antisocial behaviour from or affecting their tenants.

Throughout various engagement sessions, it was compelling listening to understand the impact of antisocial behaviour for victims, especially when the antisocial behaviour happens in or around the home - the supposed “safe space”. Given the additional severe impacts this can have on victims, it is imperative that Housing and Antisocial Behaviour Teams have effective situational tools and resources available to provide a robust response and support victims.

Within the sector, practitioners told the group that there can be opportunities for successful enforcement action within the incremental warning processes available, which in turn can also act as a preventative (and supportive) measure. Issuing verbal or written warnings can often be done in conjunction with initiating support and providing advice and assistance. Often this is enough and the majority of initial warnings served prove effective and do not require escalation to further more serious sanctions. Similarly, within noise complaints the issuing of verbal warnings is accompanied by advice and explaining consequences of further calls. This resolves the majority of cases without the requirement for escalated actions such as seizure of equipment or Fixed Penalty Notices. For many of those involved in antisocial behaviour, the realisation that their actions negatively impact those around them and the outlining of potential consequences has the desired effect of stopping the behaviour. Open discussion can then lead into any underlying difficulties that may require additional support to resolve and the support pathway can then be initiated.

As noise complaints seemed to be the most common in the sector, the group examined practices in place to prevent noise complaints, particularly in relation to domestic living noise and noise transference. Many social housing organisations already provide start up packs to new tenants, but this is much less common in the private rented sector. There are variances across the country in the levels of support provided, however housing providers do work with The Scottish Welfare Fund to provide basic items such as carpets, white goods and in some instances a sofa or a bed. Although well intentioned, often the carpets are of the most basic quality and with no other quality soft furnishings this can result in noise transference to neighbouring properties manifesting in antisocial behaviour noise complaints, when clearly other issues are the root cause. A similar picture of poor sound insulation was outlined, creating neighbour disputes over factors outwith residents’ control.

Not all cases of reported antisocial behaviour will involve complex issues requiring medium to longer term support. Situational enforcement interventions are therefore essential and can be beneficial to keep those causing antisocial behaviour out of the justice system, as well as bringing peace to those affected by their behaviour and avoiding the creation of unnecessary victims dragged into the cycle of repeat antisocial behaviour.

Good practice (at varying levels) across the sector also outlines extensive joint working and partnerships to tackle all aspects of antisocial behaviour, with information sharing key particularly when underlying or complex issues are involved. Practitioners recognise that multi-agency responses in a whole systems approach is beneficial for identifying a multi-faceted solution to tackling all the presenting issues rather than agencies working in silo.

Where prevention, interventions and support are being considered there have however been significant barriers to effective data sharing between housing providers and other partners, with core partners particularly concerned at the lack of input from Health and Social Care in partnership working. Indications from Health and Social Care partners are that this is due to fears around relevant information sharing.

Practitioners evidenced good practice examples of extensive partnership working (Inverclyde example demonstrated via the Scottish Community Safety Network), particularly robust amongst core Community Safety Partners such as Local Authorities, Police Scotland and Scottish Fire and Rescue Services, but outlined the detrimental effects of service cuts to Police, Local Authorities and especially third sector cuts to youth and community groups as increasing barriers to effective partnership working.

Services have experienced a noticeable increase in complex cases where mental health, neurodivergence, protected characteristics, domestic abuse, substance and alcohol misuse are prevalent. There was recognition, as there has been amongst all consultation groups, that poverty, social exclusion, Covid, cost of living, addictions and physical and mental health deterioration are all factors that can manifest in perceived antisocial behaviour. As one participant told us quite simply “happy people don’t commit antisocial behaviour”. Cuts to budgets and services, limiting opportunities, facilities, support and services available to people have also added to the societal problems that housing and communities teams are currently witnessing.

Consultation participants emphasised as part of our engagement that most reports received in the sector do not concern young people. Instead, the majority of complaints pertain to domestic noise issues and behaviours associated with adult neighbours.

Those adversely affected by antisocial behaviour often turn to housing or antisocial behaviour teams to provide a speedy resolve. A major challenge to the sector in terms of prevention, intervention, rehabilitation and support is that complainers expect or require an instant situational enforcement response (usually the removal of the person they deem to be causing antisocial behaviour) and are not satisfied or willing to accept a longer-term prevention strategy, while they continue to suffer the ongoing effects of the behaviours.

The sector must work within the parameters of the Housing (Scotland) Acts - predominantly 2001, 2010 and 2014 in terms of antisocial behaviour and wider legislation outlined previously. This legislation is positive in that it affords additional tools which can enable an incremental staged civil formal action resolution without criminalising those involved and should be fully considered as part of a whole systems approach. Elements of this legislation (around Short Scottish Secure Tenancies based on previous antisocial behaviour and tenants being responsible for the behaviour of household members and visitors to their home) are subject to calls for further discussion by the Chartered Institute of Housing in terms of a Human Rights Based Approach, considering should Tenancy Agreements be used in relation to regulating moral behaviours? (Chartered Institute of Housing (Scotland), Walking the Talk, 2022). The human rights of victims are of equal importance, again illustrating the complexities involved in tackling antisocial behaviour.

It should be recognised that any incremental staged enforcement action can be taken in conjunction with a preventative and supportive approach, not instead of. This is imperative when a person decides not to (or is unable to) partake in any programme of preventative supporting action, with non-engagement sited as one of the most challenging elements to overcome for practitioners, as well as the most challenging to understand for affected victims.

It has already been noted in the Equalities consultation that victims of Hate Crime feel that by moving the victim and not those causing antisocial behaviour, that there perhaps could be a culture in Housing of victim blaming and not protecting or supporting victims, especially those with protected characteristics.

There should be an awareness, that for Housing to move a perpetrator for any antisocial behaviour including Hate Crime, this requires a court order (due to the rights afforded by a Scottish Secure Tenancy). Any serious actions relying on court orders can take a considerable amount of time to obtain and for any victim of antisocial behaviour this can be frustrating and cause further fear, alarm and distress. Court delays also cause frustration to practitioners, however it should be noted that eviction numbers in Scotland for antisocial behaviour remain particularly low and would be seen as a last resort, only for the most serious of cases and only where all prevention, intervention and support has been unsuccessful in changing the behaviours.

Additional challenges within the Housing Sector relate to social housing shortages, poor quality, maintenance, overcrowding and homelessness. Scotland has declared a National Housing Emergency and additionally (at the time of writing) 12 Local Authority areas have declared a Local Housing Emergency. Recent further cuts to the affordable housing supply budget (now under review to be reinstated) will negatively impact on this unprecedented emergency situation, limit new affordable and suitable housing supply and exacerbate the worsening health and wellbeing of the population, increase stress and reduce tolerances which in turn can manifest in perceived antisocial behaviour along with the other recurring main drivers referred to throughout the report.

With almost 250,000 people in Scotland on social housing waiting lists, demand on all functions of the housing sector is rising sharply, for example, additional pressures on rent collection/income maximisation, allocations, homelessness, repairs and estate management functions meaning that antisocial behaviour is competing for priority while resources and budgets are cut and complexities in all casework are increasing. Housing Support is not a finite resource and is prioritised, which in the current climate understandably tends to be in homelessness and homeless prevention.

This means that meaningful and longer term support is often not available for those involved in antisocial behaviour, and where it is it will be general advice rather than specialised support or people will be signposted to other agencies. Third sector feedback is that they too are under-resourced, services no longer existing, funding cut and often they are also unable to allocate specialist support.

This position appears to be replicated for young people leaving care or vulnerable for other reasons, with practitioners feeling there is not enough intensive support available. It is also recognised that the support required should not be in isolation, relating solely to a housing situation but should be a trauma-informed, person-centred support plan encompassing all presenting issues, as stated in The Promise. Good practice already exists in terms of Rapid Re-Housing Transition Programmes and Housing First with wrap-around support for Homeless applicants and could be explored to expand in relation to antisocial behaviour.

Housing providers deal with distressed and fearful residents on a daily basis. Often the impact can be lack of sleep, missing shifts at work, danger at work due to lack of sleep, children exposed to traumatic events, education affected by lack of sleep or disturbances, mental and physical health symptoms and the feeling of nobody looking out for their needs. They speak of not wanting support, that they would not need support if they weren’t exposed to antisocial behaviour in the first place, particularly serious and repeated incidents and the solution that they seek is either to move or have the offending neighbour moved - all very difficult and unmanageable in the current housing emergency and within the legal powers available to the housing sector.

This illustrates the real need not only to examine the way the housing sector prevents and supports those causing antisocial behaviour, but in order to be fully trauma informed and ensure neighbours and the wider community are not engulfed in antisocial behaviour, real consideration needs to be given to those directly affected by antisocial behaviour and this may include situational enforcement solutions where appropriate. It is recognised that housing providers have a role to play in their duties to the wider community and this may conflict with obligations to individuals which means that any approach must take cognise of Prevention, Intervention, Education, Support but also have Enforcement options available to ensure the wider community feel safe.

Actions:

• Review and enhance situational response tools available to local authority antisocial behaviour teams and social housing providers, recognising that robust incremental enforcement tools can stop escalation into more serious behaviours whilst initiating longer term supportive and preventative measures.
• Develop housing allocation policies that pre-emptively avoid potential conflicts by considering compatibility factors (e.g. known antisocial behaviour issues), ensuring that the needs of victims and affected communities are prioritised while remaining mindful of fairness and avoiding discrimination.
• Consider priority timescales within the current court backlog for criminal cases with linked Housing or Antisocial Behaviour team cases to be heard at court. Consider special sittings in civil courts for serious housing antisocial behaviour cases seeking legal actions to be progressed, with increased weight given to victim impact statements.
• Adopt a spend to save upstream prevention and investment approach for social housing providers to provide floor coverings of a quality standard which could alleviate further noise transmission complaints and offer savings in terms of negative follow up contacts.
• More systematic data collection around housing related antisocial behaviour, including key demographics relating to those causing antisocial behaviour and victims - expanding indicators already reported on to The Scottish Housing Regulator.
• Investment by social housing providers in preventative tenancy support programmes prior to new, first or ‘failed’ tenancy allocations to equip young tenants or tenants with a history of antisocial behaviour with life skills and resilience to sustain a tenancy without becoming entrenched in antisocial behaviour.