Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council’s handling of her noise nuisance complaint. She says the Council has not investigated her complaints adequately and has not considered her recordings. We do not find fault with the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the Council’s handling of her noise nuisance complaint. She says the Council has not investigated her complaints adequately and has not considered her recordings of the alleged noise nuisance. Mrs X says the noise from her neighbour is affecting her and her family’s health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I spoke with Mrs X and considered the information she provided.
6. I made enquiries with the Council and considered the information it provided.
7. I sent a draft decision to Mrs X and the Council and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and guidance

8. Under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, councils have a duty to take reasonable steps to investigate potential statutory nuisances.
9. For the issue to count as a statutory nuisance, the council must decide it:
• unreasonably and substantially interferes with the use or enjoyment of a home or other premise; and/or
• injures health or is likely to injure health.
10. There is no fixed point at which something becomes a statutory nuisance. Councils will rely on suitably qualified officer, generally an environmental health officer, to gather evidence. They may, for example, as the complainant to complete diary sheets, fit noise-monitoring equipment, or undertake site visits.
11. Once the evidence gathering process is complete, the environmental health officer(s) will assess the evidence. They will consider factors such as the timing, duration, and intensity of the alleged nuisance. The council officer(s) will use their professional judgment to decide whether a statutory nuisance exists.

Background

12. Mrs X has made noise complaints regarding her neighbour since 2015. The Council has provided evidence of the action it took between 2015-2018 to address Mrs X’s noise complaints. The records showed the Council installed noise monitoring equipment, asked Mrs X to complete noise diary sheets, attempted to witness the reported noise nuisance, and listened to tapes recorded by Mrs X.
13. The evidence also showed Mrs X declined the Council’s offer to visit the property to witness the reported nuisance on several occasions.
14. The Council told Mrs X it had considered the evidence gathered but did not reach the view the noise was a statutory nuisance.
15. The Council also explained to Mrs X it considered her reports to be about domestic noise, such as loud talking, footsteps, and children playing. The Council told Mrs X it would not complete any further investigation of reports of noise of a similar nature. However, the Council would respond to reports of any new noise nuisance.

What happened

16. In March 2019, Mrs X contacted the Council’s out of hours service several times to report noise nuisance from her neighbour. A council officer visited in March but noted they did not witness any noise.
17. The Council again visited Mrs X in April 2019. The Council’s records showed the Council stayed at Mrs X’s address for an hour and a half to witness the reported noise nuisance. The Council noted no noise witnessed. The Council also listened to Mrs X’s CCTV footage of the alleged noise nuisance.
18. Between May and June 2019, Mrs X reported noise to the Council’s out of hours service. The Council offered to visit Mrs X to witness the noise, but Mrs X declined.
19. In August 2019, the Council again visited Mrs X to attempt to witness the noise nuisance. The Council noted the officer stayed for 30 minutes but did not witness any noise. The officer told Mrs X to contact the out of hours service if the noise started again.
20. Between October to November 2019, Mrs X called the Council’s out of hours service to report noise coming from her neighbour. The records showed the Council offered to visit to witness the noise, but Mrs X declined. Mrs X said she declined because her son was very sick.
21. In December 2019, the Council offered to install noise recording equipment, but Mrs X declined as she felt there was no point as her neighbour would know when it was installed. The Council told Mrs X it would not tell her neighbour when the equipment was installed. The Council visited Mrs X at the end of December, but again the officer noted no noise witnessed.
22. Throughout January 2020, Mrs X continued to report noise nuisance. The records showed the Council offered to visit Mrs X, but she declined.
23. Between July and December 2020, the Council’s records showed Mrs X contacted the Council to report noise nuisance; mostly regarding banging, loud talking, and shouting. The Council offered to visit Mrs X but Mrs X told the Council she could not allow officers to visit the property as they were shielding because of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Analysis

24. The Council has a duty to take reasonable steps to investigate potential statutory nuisances. It is for the Council to decide how to investigate and to consider the evidence it gathers during its investigation. The Council must use its professional judgment to decide whether a statutory nuisance exists.
25. It is clear from the evidence there has been a long history of noise reports made by Mrs X. The evidence shows the Council had considered Mrs X’s reports and told her in 2016 and 2017 that it did not consider the noise reported to be a statutory nuisance.
26. The Council told Mrs X it would not complete any further investigation into reports of domestic noise. However, the Council continued to respond to Mrs X’s reports of noise nuisance, which mainly concerned domestic noise, in 2019 and 2020.
27. Evidence shows the Council visited Mrs X three times between March and August 2019 to attempt to witness the noise nuisance. The Council also listened to Mrs X’s CCTV recordings.
28. In 2020, the Council also continuously offered to visit Mrs X’s property and to install noise monitoring equipment. These offered were declined by Mrs X, but I do recognise she had good reasons to decline the offer from July 2020 due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
29. Therefore, I do not find fault with the Council’s actions as the evidence shows the Council has taken reasonable steps to investigate Mrs X’s noise complaints. Further, the Council has properly considered the evidence available before deciding the reported noise does not amount to a statutory nuisance. As the Council has made its decision properly, I cannot find fault with the decision itself.

Back to top

Final decision

30. I find no fault with the Council’s actions in relation to Mrs X’s noise nuisance complaint. Therefore, I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman