Introduction

Through supporting victims of anti-social behaviour, we sometimes come across cases where an individual has been offered mediation as a way to try and tackle the issue at hand. However, naturally, we find that these individuals may have preconceptions about mediation or feel like they are being ‘mutually blamed’ by being offered mediation, rather than agencies taking action against the alleged perpetrator.   

However, there is a lot more to mediation than just a discussion. 

Therefore, we want to provide you, our readers, with some information around mediation, and some common misconceptions about it.  

In order to provide you with expert advice on mediation, we linked in with Solution Talk, a recognised leader in the field of mediation, who have kindly provided some insight into the common misconceptions they come across in their mediation work as well as a case study in which misconceptions were challenged, leading to positive outcomes for an individual experiencing anti-social behaviour. 

Table of contents

What is mediation?

The UK government defines mediation as: 

“A flexible and confidential process used to settle a dispute between two or more people, businesses or other organisations.

Mediations can involve appointing a mediator who is an independent and impartial third person, to help the parties talk through the issues, negotiate, and come to a mutually agreeable solution.”

What can mediation be used for?

Mediation can be used to address anti-social behaviour and neighbour disputes that could potentially lead to anti-social behaviour if unaddressed. 

This could include, but is not limited to: 

    • Parking, access and/or boundary disputes 
    • Noise nuisance cases 
    • Animal nuisance 
    • Children’s behaviour 

Mediation myths 

Below we will discuss some of the common misconceptions around mediation.  

Common misconception #1: It’s not my fault so mediation won’t work 

One of the most common things we hear from victims who have been offered mediation is  

“I haven’t done anything wrong, so why am I being offered mediation?” 

Sometimes victims can feel like they are being mutually blamed for the situation. However, blame holds no place in the mediation process. Instead, mediation offers a safe and confidential space where you can share your perspective with the mediator including what has been happening, how it’s affecting you and what changes you would like to see moving forward. The mediator is there to listen without judgement and outline available options for next steps. From there, it’s entirely up to the parties involved top decide how they want to proceed. Mediation is a collaborative, problem-solving process, encouraging open communication and understanding.  

Common misconception #2: My situation is too complex! 

Another common misconception is that mediation isn’t suitable for complex or high conflict situations. In reality – mediation, when led by skilled professionals, it can handle complex and challenging matters with care and sensitivity. Mediation helps parties to shift their focus from what they want to what they truly need in order to move towards a resolution. 

Common misconception #3: The other person is too unreasonable for mediation to work. 

Mediation provides valuable perspective for everyone involved. It helps individuals gain an understanding of the other person’s viewpoint and the reasons behind their behaviour. This process can move the conversation away from blame and towards mutual understanding — a crucial first step in resolving conflict. Participation in mediation doesn’t require both parties to be co-operative from the outset; it simply requires your presence and agreement to an initial individual pre-mediation conversation with your mediator.  

Common misconception #4: The mediator will act like a judge or take sides. 

Mediators act as impartial third parties – they don’t take sides or make decisions for anyone involved. The role of the mediator is to create a balanced space where you have the chance to speak and be heard. They will help to navigate complex emotions and keep the conversation focused and productive. If at any point someone feels uncomfortable, or mediation isn’t progressing – the process can be paused or ended. Participation is entirely voluntary, so the choice to take part is always yours. 

Pauline’s mediation journey: a mediation case study 

Below is a case study provided by Solution Talk detailing the journey of one of their previous clients, Pauline, through the mediation process.  

Background 

Pauline, a 53-year-old woman living in a small housing development, had been experiencing ongoing conflict with her neighbour, Sam, for well over a year. The issues ranged from loud TV noise at night to arguments over shared bins, boundary lines, and even accusations about petty vandalism. Things had escalated to the point where communication had broken down and they had resorted to dirty looks and under the breath comments when seeing each other. Pauline was really stressed about the situation and was constantly reporting Sam to her housing provider. 

When her housing officer suggested mediation with Sam, Pauline’s immediate reaction was “Absolutely not, under no circumstances.” 

The misconceptions holding Pauline back 

Before she agreed to anything, Pauline had a long list of reasons why mediation wasn’t for her: 

“My situation is too complex.”  
There were too many issues, too much history, and too many emotions involved. Pauline was convinced this was beyond fixing. 

“Mediation can only happen in person.”
She wasn’t comfortable sitting in the same room as Sam, the thought alone made her feel anxious. 

“It’s not confidential.”  
Pauline worried that whatever she said might somehow be repeated to Sam, or worse, used against her by housing staff. 

 “The mediator will act like a judge or take sides.”
She believed that the mediator might sympathise with Sam more or try to tell her what she should do. 

“I don’t want any more conflict.”  
For Pauline, the safest option was avoidance. She didn’t want to face more arguments or awkward confrontations and enduring the dirty looks felt like the safer option. 

“It’s not my fault.” 
In her view, she hadn’t done anything wrong. Sam was the unreasonable one. Why should she have to do anything? The housing should be dealing with him. 

What changed her mind 

Pauline initially agreed to having a no obligation pre-mediation call with the mediator, just to get a sense of how it all worked. She expected it to be formal or uncomfortable, maybe even a bit awkward. But instead, the mediator was calm, friendly, and genuinely listened to what she had to say. They didn’t blame her or tell her what she should be doing. They acknowledged how the situation had made her feel and the impact it was having on her day-to-day life. Then they asked a simple but powerful question: What would need to change for things to feel better? What would you like Sam to do differently? For the first time in a long while, Pauline felt heard and understood. 

The mediator explained that: 

      • Mediation was confidential — nothing Pauline said in her private session would be shared without her agreement, unless there were safeguarding issues. 
      • The process didn’t require her to meet Sam in person – it could take place by phone or online, and only if she felt ready. 
      • Mediators don’t take sides or make decisions – they’re there to support a balanced conversation and identify mutually acceptable solutions and if it didn’t feel right, she could stop at any time. 

That first conversation made her feel respected, safe and unexpectedly, hopeful. 

The mediation experience 

A week later, Pauline agreed to move forward with an online joint mediation meeting with Sam. It wasn’t about rehashing the past; it focused on what needed to change moving forward. 

With the mediator’s support, both Pauline and Sam had a chance to speak and be heard. Surprisingly, Sam also felt misunderstood and overwhelmed. Once they moved past assumptions, it became clear: they both wanted the same thing. A peaceful coexistence as neighbours and privacy in their homes. 

They reached a simple agreement around: 

      • Reducing noise after 9pm
      • Respecting boundaries and shared spaces
      • Direct communication that would be calm and respectful

The outcome 

There would be no further tit for tat complaints and therefore no enforcement action or directives necessary from the housing association. Just two people finding a way to co-exist with less stress in a way they were both happy with. 

Pauline said afterward: 

“It was nothing like I imagined. I thought mediation meant giving in or being blamed. But it gave me space to say what I needed to say, safely. It made Sam see my side too and that was the first real change. We made decisions about our situation that worked for us both.” 

Conclusion 

Pauline’s story is a powerful reminder that our assumptions about mediation often come from fear or misunderstanding.

      • Mediation isn’t about blame — it’s about clarity.
      • It’s not about being forced — it’s about being heard.
      • It works even when things feel messy, emotional, or stuck.

Pauline didn’t think mediation would help. But it did and now, her home feels like her safe space and a place of calm again. 

Conclusion 

We hope that this blog has shed some light on the process of mediation and broke down some of the misconceptions attached to it. Mediation can be a powerful tool for those involved to communicate openly and safely.