Women falsely given Asbo wins payout after council failed to check allegations

The Local Government Ombudsman said Manchester City Council was guilty of an "abuse of power of nightmarish proportions".

Reasonable inquiries that would have cast doubt on the veracity of the complaints from the woman's neighbour were not made, a report found.

In June 2004 Miss A complained to the council that she was suffering at the hands of anti-social behaviour from neighbour Mrs X.

She claimed she had been subjected to verbal abuse, intimidation, loud music, threats of violence and offensive gestures.

She said she had fallen ill as a result of the nuisance and was receiving counselling.

The council told her to keep a diary of events and said it would also contact police and other neighbours to corroborate the allegations.

In October 2004 an application for an on-notice Asbo was issued in court and a hearing date set for December 3 2004.

Mrs X was unaware of the Asbo until papers were served on her on December 1 2004. Following a short adjournment to allow her to prepare, an interim Asbo was granted against her in court just five days later.

She contested the decision and with the help of 22 letters in her defence from fellow neighbours managed to overturn the decision three months later.

The order was discharged by the court and the case was withdrawn by the council in May 2005 after an internal review of the matter.

Ombudsman Jerry White said in the 10 months between the initial complaint from Miss A and the council review there was no evidence that any interviews with other residents took place.

He added: "It is extraordinary that the allegations were never put to Mrs X before the council sought an Asbo against her, at first behind her back and then by serving papers on her just days before a court hearing.

"It is extraordinary too that it never sought corroboratory evidence from third parties even when some allegations of loud music could have been verified.

"This was an abuse of nightmarish proportions. It should never be allowed to happen again."

Ruling that the council was guilty of maladministration, he recommended that the council review its practices and procedures in the administration of its anti-social behaviour responsibilities.

He said the council had agreed to apologise to Mrs X and pay £2,000 in compensation, after initially offering only £500.