Noise archive 2019-2020


Archive has 89 results

  • London Borough of Croydon (19 003 120)

    Statement Upheld Noise 06-Feb-2020

    Summary: Ms B complained about the Council’s failure to respond properly and take effective action in response to her reports of noise nuisance and anti-social behaviour from her neighbour. Ms B says she suffered unacceptable levels of noise and anti-social behaviour for longer than necessary which affected her health and well-being. The Ombudsman has found delay by the Council but considers the actions it has already taken together with £100 and a review of procedure is enough to provide a suitable remedy.

  • Durham County Council (19 014 228)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Noise 31-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mr B complains about the way the Council dealt with his reports of noise nuisance from neighbours and their dogs. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because an investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to add to that already carried out by the Council and is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

  • Gravesham Borough Council (18 016 083)

    Statement Not upheld Noise 29-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mr B complains the Council has not done enough to tackle his neighbours’ antisocial behaviour and noise. He says that as a result his family are being harassed and victimised. There was no fault by the Council. It properly considered each complaint of noise and antisocial behaviour, and decided that there was no basis for it to take any formal action.

  • Bristol City Council (19 003 940)

    Statement Upheld Noise 27-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mrs X complains the Council gave her misleading information about what constituted unacceptable noise from works at a neighbouring property. The Council gave incorrect information about working time guidelines and then then wrongly advised it would issue a fixed penalty notice. The Council has reviewed the noise recordings and established no statutory nuisance existed. An appropriate remedy for the injustice caused is agreed.

  • Dartford Borough Council (18 010 432)

    Statement Not upheld Noise 17-Jan-2020

    Summary: Miss J complains about the council’s delay in dealing with noise nuisance from her neighbour. The Ombudsman cannot criticise the Council’s view that the evidence it had was not sufficient for it to take action. We have found some shortcomings in the Council’s actions, but not enough to make a finding of fault.

  • Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (19 005 680)

    Statement Upheld Noise 15-Jan-2020

    Summary: The Council failed properly to investigate a complaint of noise nuisance. It twice closed the case without telling the complainant. The Council did not treat the complainant’s formal complaint about the lack of action fairly and objectively. The Council will apologise to the complainant and pay her £150 for the unnecessary frustration, time and trouble it caused her. If the complainant makes a further noise complaint about the same issue, the Council will properly investigate this.

  • Transport for London (19 007 726)

    Statement Not upheld Noise 10-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mr X complained Transport for London took no action over noise and vibration from the underground line. There was no fault in the way the authority investigated the complaint. While the final complaint response was delayed, this did not cause any injustice.

  • Wyre Borough Council (19 005 435)

    Statement Not upheld Noise 08-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s investigation into his reports of noise nuisance from a nearby supermarket. Mr X said the matter remains unresolved and the noise is ongoing. The Council was not at fault. It carried out an investigation in line with relevant legislation and policy and decided the noise did not constitute a statutory nuisance.

  • South Somerset District Council (19 003 271)

    Statement Not upheld Noise 08-Jan-2020

    Summary: There was no fault by the Council in a complaint which alleged its decision to stop a noise nuisance investigation was flawed.

  • East Staffordshire Borough Council (19 014 374)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Noise 02-Jan-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint alleging that noise from a van early in the morning represents a statutory nuisance. This is because I have seen no fault in the way the Council reached its decisions on this case. Additionally with respect to a complaint about noise from a trail bike, there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings