With many neighbour problems, the first piece of advice is to start a conversation. Legally, this is sometimes simply a requirement too, for example when a dividing wall has to be built. Reasonableness is generally assumed, but in practice that is not always the case. Unfortunately, it is not unusual: neighbours who are hostile, swear, spit, throw their rubbish over the dividing wall … This page describes the situation in the Netherlands.
From simple dispute to intimidation and criminal offences
A neighbour dispute usually starts with a conflict phase in which a disagreement arises. Emotions may then run high when the disagreement comes up again. We speak of intimidation, however, when the neighbours really start actively harassing someone, or all the neighbours. There is often a transition from an ordinary neighbour matter on which a civil court has to rule to criminal offences against which action should also be taken under criminal law.
In practice, however, many neighbours feel unacknowledged, and intimidation is still too often dismissed as a simple neighbour dispute, including by municipalities and even by the police. A telling example of this is a case in which a dispute about a right of way (recht van overpad) ended in the neighbours being harassed for years. During this time, a car was vandalised seven times, outdoor lights were smashed dozens of times, garden chairs were smeared with excrement time and again, and the neighbour forced his way into the neighbours' home.
The events began in 2000, but the neighbours had to litigate for years to put an end to it. They often got no hearing from the local authorities, and the case was dismissed as a simple neighbour dispute. In the end, they went to court. In 2007 and 2010, the neighbour was given a suspended sentence. The behaviour did not stop, however. In 2016, he was ordered to pay a penalty payment (dwangsom) of €300,000 to make the behaviour stop for good. Never before had such a high penalty payment been imposed, but the neighbour paid the penalty payment and carried on.
In 2017, a contact ban was finally imposed, the neighbour had to go to prison for three months, and two weeks in prison would be added for each new violation. In 2019, after further litigation, the court of appeal ruled differently from the district court, and the sentence was converted into a suspended prison sentence.
See also the pages about vandalism by neighbours and noise nuisance. The neighbour always maintained that the neighbours provoked him so that they could then claim compensation.
Importance of a good case file
In any case, this case shows how difficult it is to shake off the label of neighbour dispute. The neighbours needed a great deal of hard evidence for that. For example, the neighbours had installed night cameras which showed that the neighbour was puncturing car tyres at night. It really has to be shown that the intimidation goes so far that it is a serious invasion of privacy.
An important element in this is keeping a diary in which you note when the nuisance takes place and what it consists of. In January 2018, the Central Netherlands District Court (Rechtbank Midden-Nederland) (ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2018:318) gave a ruling in a case in which such a diary had been kept. Over a period of three years, just under 300 incidents were described in it, ranging from noise nuisance to imitating children, spitting, throwing liquids, smearing cars with food leftovers and so on. In the end, the neighbour was banned from causing them any further nuisance, enforced with a penalty payment (dwangsom) of €500 per violation, up to a maximum of €50,000.
In practice, a diary alone will not be enough, and objective data is also needed that substantiates as much of the nuisance described as possible. Photos, videos and audio clips that can be linked to the nuisance described in the log are valuable. These elements also played an important role in the case described above.
Either way, it will not always be possible to capture everything on camera, but even then there are a number of things you can do to support the case file. Witness statements from, for example, local residents or the postman are valuable. In addition, it is important to keep consistently reporting every criminal offence to the police and to keep stating that it is not merely a neighbour dispute. The more such findings are made, the easier it will be for the authorities to come to this realisation. Moreover, it is also important to keep asking the neighbour in writing to stop this behaviour. This correspondence too, especially if things are not disputed, can later be used to the victims' advantage.
Stopping intimidation and harassment
The criminal law route can be an effective way to make the harassment stop. Fines and (suspended) prison sentences can convince the neighbours that they had better change their behaviour.
Fines and prison sentences can only be imposed by the criminal court, and only if the criminal offences have been proven. The main aim is of course to stop the violations and to punish the violations committed. When criminal offences cannot be (sufficiently) proven, the civil law route remains open, even when it concerns "innocent" harassment.
The civil court can then not only issue a ban to stop this nuisance, if necessary backed by a penalty payment, but can also order compensation. This compensation then consists of, among other things, non-material damages (smartengeld) or compensation for loss of enjoyment of the home, but compensation is also possible for reduced job satisfaction when working from home, damaged mental health, costs that were necessary to establish the criminal offences, and the like. Necessary costs include, for example, the purchase of cameras or the costs of the many letters calling for the violations to stop.
When the other party is a tenant, it can sometimes also be worthwhile to approach their landlord. The landlord may be able to end the tenancy agreement fairly easily. In addition, the landlord can also be forced through civil proceedings to have the tenancy agreement with the intimidating neighbour dissolved.
More information about tenancy law in the NetherlandsIt will have to be determined case by case what the best route is. A lawyer is your best friend here. If you have legal expenses insurance, the legal expenses insurer can help determine which legal route can be taken. Legal assistance is also provided.
Frequently asked questions about harassment and intimidation by neighbours
My neighbours are bullying me. Can the housing association do anything for me?
A housing association (woningcorporatie) has a social task, and the Behavioural Order Guide (Handreiking Gedragsaanwijzing) of the Centre for Crime Prevention and Safety (Centrum voor Criminaliteitspreventie en Veiligheid, CCV) therefore contains a number of guidelines intended to help the housing association offer support. The focus is first of all on starting a conversation and checking whether mediation is a solution, but moreover a housing association can also actively contribute to building a case file and can also take further steps. In practice, however, it is difficult for a housing association to distinguish between simple neighbour disputes and harassment, as they do not experience the problems themselves and often have to make do with the conflicting statements of the parties involved. Staff are also often not trained in harassment problems, and reports are looked at in isolation. In any case, it remains important to keep reporting and also to contribute yourself to any mediation attempts.
When is it time to call in the police?
In a simple neighbour dispute, it is not always necessary to call in the police straight away. It is then always better to try to talk to each other first and to consider community mediation (buurtbemiddeling). However, when criminal offences are committed, such as the destruction of property, it is advisable to call in the police.
What does the Housing Nuisance Act do about intimidation by neighbours?
The Housing Nuisance Act (Wet aanpak woonoverlast, Article 151d of the Municipalities Act, Gemeentewet) has applied since 1 July 2017. Only if the municipal council has provided for this in a bye-law, usually the General Local Bye-law (Algemene Plaatselijke Verordening, APV), can the mayor take action against serious and repeated nuisance for local residents, and only if that nuisance cannot be countered in another suitable way. The mayor can then impose an order subject to a penalty payment (last onder dwangsom) or administrative enforcement (bestuursdwang), for example in the form of a behavioural order (gedragsaanwijzing), and as a last resort a temporary ban from the home (tijdelijk huisverbod): a ban on being in or near the home for ten days, which can be extended to a maximum of four weeks. Initially, mediation is usually the first approach. This can be a worthwhile tool, but municipalities run into the same problems as housing associations. For them too, it is often difficult to distinguish between isolated incidents and persistent harassment. Moreover, municipalities, like judges, also consider sanctions such as a ban from the home very far-reaching, because it can be the precursor to even more serious problems.
I want the neighbours to stop the intimidation. What claim can I bring before the civil court?
There are various procedures that can be followed. When the intimidation goes very far and needs to be ended quickly, urgent proceedings before the civil court are advisable. For a final judgment, the full proceedings must be followed. In both cases, compensation can also be claimed.