Preaching Engagement, Practicing Intimidation

For most housing providers, mediation is a key tool for resolving disputes fairly and constructively. Yet, for GreenSquareAccord, it seems to be entirely off the table. Instead, they rely on legal threats, ASBOs, and even police involvement, turning what should be discussions into battles (SLAPPS).

What makes this more troubling is the stark contrast between their actions and their public messaging. GreenSquareAccord frequently claims to learn from complaints and engage with residents, positioning themselves as an organisation that values open communication. They’ve even spoken at the National Housing Federation’s events, touting the power of dialogue. But on the ground, their approach is far from this narrative.

Rather than working with residents to resolve concerns, GreenSquareAccord resorts to heavy-handed legal action. Instead of offering mediation, they involve the police. And instead of fostering trust, they create a culture of fear. The question is: why does GreenSquareAccord say one thing and do another?

Isn’t it good to talk?

It’s not just residents calling for mediation—independent bodies have also urged GreenSquareAccord to take this approach, only to be ignored.

Take the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), for example. When GreenSquareAccord complained about my website, falsely claiming I breached customer data by storing resident information, the ICO recommended they engage in mediation. In an email, the ICO asked GreenSquareAccord if they had attempted to speak with me before escalating the issue. Their response, written by Sophie Atkinson, Head of Legal and Governance, claimed they had tried to engage with me but received no reply.

Next, the Housing Ombudsman upheld a complaint I made against GreenSquareAccord, suggesting they use mediation to rebuild the tenant relationship. Instead, they avoided it—citing their contact management plan, a policy of their own making, which conveniently shielded them from accountability.

Even judges saw through this approach. In two separate court cases, they advised GreenSquareAccord to seek mediation with me, but again, they refused. Their final move was to escalate matters to the police, leading to my arrest.

And what was the basis for the harassment claim? The only evidence submitted was an email I sent to Steve Hayes, their Communications Director, where I simply asked, “Why don’t we have a coffee?” Instead of responding in good faith, this was used as supposed proof of harassment.

This is a housing association that claims to be open to communication. A housing association whose CEO, Ruth Cooke, tells the Housing Ombudsman that GreenSquareAccord learns from their mistakes and communicates effectively with residents. But in reality, their approach is anything but open.

The Bigger Concern: How Often Does This Happen?

If I hadn’t stood up to their legal threats, this pattern of behaviour would have remained hidden. How many other residents have been intimidated into silence, afraid to speak out for fear of legal action? How many voices have been lost because GreenSquareAccord refuses to engage in the very mediation they publicly claim to support?

ASBOs and the Culture of Disdain: How GreenSquareAccord Silences Those Who Speak Out

Their response to vulnerable residents is equally alarming. In multiple cases, elderly individuals—pillars of their community—have been issued ASBOs after raising complaints about poor management and communication breakdowns.

One such resident, who has since sadly passed away, was living in a shared block of flats where the manager was supposed to oversee repairs and ensure smooth operations. Instead, the manager’s behaviour seemed more like a game of tattle-tale than professional support. When the elderly resident raised concerns, he was met with an ASBO and police intervention. This wasn’t isolated; a similar situation occurred in Wiltshire, where another elderly resident was issued an ASBO after a conflict with a warden, whose role was to support him and his neighbours.

Rather than addressing the communication breakdown, GreenSquareAccord responded with swift punishment, silencing those who spoke out. This reflects a deeper, more disturbing culture: a mechanism for shutting down complaints, silencing residents, and blaming those who raise concerns.

When residents voice complaints or engage in “excessive” communication, they face retribution. If too many emails are sent, a communication ban is imposed. If a complaint persists, residents are directed to customer service desks, distancing the issue from senior management. This isn’t about resolving complaints; it’s about stopping them from ever reaching the top. It’s about making residents feel small, unheard, and powerless.

This is the GSA way—keeping the CEO, Ruth Cooke, and the board at arm’s length from the issues. When complaints are blocked at lower levels, they never reach those who could take action. Instead, the issues fester, unresolved, while the narrative of victim-blaming continues. Residents, many already struggling, are left to fight an uphill battle with little hope of resolution.

Holding GreenSquareAccord Accountable

GreenSquareAccord’s refusal to engage in mediation and reliance on legal threats, ASBOs, and punitive actions expose a troubling culture within the housing association. This isn’t just poor management; it’s creating an environment where residents feel silenced, blamed, and powerless.

It’s time for GreenSquareAccord to walk the talk. If they are truly committed to learning from complaints and improving communication, they need to create an environment where residents feel heard, supported, and respected—not punished for raising legitimate concerns. This needs to go beyond the GreenSquareAccord Customer Panel, which has driven little meaningful change and remains a tick-box exercise rather than a tool for genuine progress.

In reality, the power lies with us to push for accountability and demand change. Residents, advocates, and communities must continue to stand up, raise our voices, and challenge GreenSquareAccord’s damaging practices. Only then can we hope for a housing sector that listens and works collaboratively with those it serves. Mediation isn’t just a tool for conflict resolution; it’s a vital process that can rebuild trust, foster communication, and lead to better outcomes. Yet, GreenSquareAccord continues to reject this approach, escalating matters until residents face criminalisation, intimidation, and isolation.

GreenSquareAccord’s attempts to suppress free speech online show just how far they will go to control the narrative. They have relentlessly sought to have my website removed, contacting platforms like YouTube, LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter to silence me and others. They even reported me to my website provider, falsely claiming I was breaching copyright law. Despite this, pressure from residents and social media led GreenSquareAccord to allow comments on their Facebook posts again—though those comments are often critical of their practices.

This effort to silence isn’t just about defending their reputation; it’s about avoiding accountability. GreenSquareAccord refuses to engage in mediation or admit fault because doing so would mean confronting the truth: they’ve fallen short in many areas. Since Ruth Cook took over, the association has refused to acknowledge its mistakes, doubling down on a defensive posture. Without owning their shortcomings, it’s clear they can’t learn from them.

While GreenSquareAccord may tout their supposed achievements to the Housing Ombudsman, claiming transparency and effective communication, their actions tell a different story. GreenSquareAccord shuts down any disagreement—through legal action, ASBOs, or silencing online voices. They are more concerned with maintaining a controlled narrative than addressing the concerns of those they serve. The breakdown in communication isn’t due to a lack of ability; it’s because they don’t want to communicate.

It’s time for GreenSquareAccord to stop playing the victim and start listening. They need to embrace mediation, take responsibility for their mistakes, and change how they engage with residents. Until then, the truth will continue to speak louder than any of their PR efforts.