Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council handled his reports of anti-social behaviour against his next-door neighbour during 2019. The Council considered Mr X’s reports of anti-social behaviour in line with its policy when it decided to take no further action. It was not at fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the way the Council handled his reports of anti-social behaviour (ASB) against his next-door neighbour during 2019. Mr X said the Council failed to properly investigate or consider his complaint about the matter.
2. Mr X said his continues to suffer from ASB which is causing him distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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 considered Mr X’s complaint correspondence with the Council and then further information he provided during the course of the investigation.
6. I considered the Council’s response to my enquiry letter.
7. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered comments before I made a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB)

8. Councils have a duty to act to address anti-social behaviour. The Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 gave councils new powers to address anti-social behaviour. These include civil injunctions and community protection notices.
9. The statutory guidance which accompanies the Act sets out some early and informal interventions which may be used to address anti-social behaviour. This includes verbal and written warnings, mediation and acceptable behaviour contracts.

The Council’s ASB Policy

10. The Council’s policy lists actions it will take when people report ASB to it. It says it will:
• Take the complaint seriously and investigate it.
• Encourage self and community resolution where possible.
• Work with other agencies to try and resolve issues.
• Consider a range of measures to best resolve the complaint.
• Ensure people know how to complaint if they are not happy with the service they received.

What happened

11. In July 2019 Mr X contacted the Council about ASB from his next-door neighbour. Both Mr X and his neighbours live-in privately-owned properties. Mr X said he wanted the Council’s ASB team mediate the situation. Mr X referred to a past complaint he made in 2017 about ASB from his neighbour. The Council said it had received no contact from Mr X since July 2018 following his 2017 complaint. It asked Mr X to submit a log sheet with further details about the ongoing ASB.
12. Mr X submitted log sheets to the Council in support of his concerns which detailed incidents he said had occurred between May and July 2019. The incidents Mr X reported included:
• Noise
• general nuisance including his neighbour hanging things on and painting his fence.
• loud music, people drinking beer and drunken talking in the garden late at night.
• banging doors
• barking and whining dogs
• Dogs fouling on his front lawn.
• A man swearing at him and asking him to move his car.
• Receiving letters from a credit card company addressed to his neighbour but with Mr X’s address on it.
13. The considered Mr X’s concerns and emailed him with a response and advice about the appropriate course of action to try and resolve the issues. The Council said most of the incidents reported by Mr X related to noise. The Council said the police had in the past tried to mediate with Mr X’s neighbours and therefore it said it was unlikely contact from the ASB team would have a long-lasting impact. The Council advised Mr X to contact the Council’s noise team which it said was the most appropriate service to deal with noise nuisance. The Council provided Mr X with the relevant contact number and website details.
14. The Council considered the other matters Mr X raised were civil matters and as such advised him to seek independent legal advice. It said with regards to dogs fouling on his lawn it could only take action where this occurred on Council land. It recommended Mr X erect fencing or planting shrubs as preventative measures to restrict unwanted persons or dogs.
15. The Council advised if Mr X had other incidents of ASB which occurred in the last 6 months to report them for its consideration. It advised Mr X of the Council’s complaint’s procedure if he was unhappy with the Council’s decision to take no further action.
16. Mr X wrote back to the Council unhappy with its response stating it did not want to deal with his ASB problems and was ignoring his issues. The Council responded stating it required further information about the issues he raised. Mr X said providing more information would take him a long time. He said he needed the Council to convince him it would take him seriously before he spent time providing further details. Mr X asked whether the Council would reopen his complaint from 2017. The Council advised too much time had passed since his 2017 complaint to reopen it. It told Mr X he would need to submit a new complaint.
17. Mr X formally complained to the Council in September 2019. He complained:
• Matters which the Council considered civil matters were in fact criminal matters.
• Making a complaint to the noise team was unacceptable.
• The Council had an over reliance on incident logs.

Mr X said he would not provide further information until the Council satisfied him it would take his complaint seriously. Mr X said he wanted mediation to help solve the issues he has with his neighbour. He said he had no confidence in either the ASB or the noise team and said the Council had failed to meet its legal obligations in relation to ASB.

18. The Council offered to meet with Mr X to discuss his complaint. Mr X said he was willing to meet but with conditions that he could record the meeting and meet at a neutral venue. Mr X also wanted confirmation of which Council staff would attend the meeting. The Council confirmed the officers who would attend. The Council sought advice from its legal team around Mr X recording the meeting. It did not agree to Mr X recording the meeting but said it would make a note taker available. It said the venue would be at Council offices. Mr X said a note taker was unacceptable. The Council therefore decided to provide a written response to Mr X’s complaint.
19. The Council sent Mr X a stage 1 complaint response after reviewing his case. It found no evidence the Council had not listened to Mr X or taken his concerns seriously. The Council said incident logs were necessary to show an evidence trail. The Council said it would consider further information about ASB incidents if Mr X wishes to submit them.
20. Mr X remained unhappy and asked to escalate his complaint to stage 2. Mr X further complained the Council had failed to deal with this complaint in a timely manner. The Council carried out an internal review of its handling of Mr X’s concerns. This found the Council had made reasonable attempts to address his issues and that no further investigation or actions were necessary. The Council issued Mr X with its final response and said it was satisfied it had handled Mr X’s ASB concerns fairly. The Council acknowledged it took longer than usual to respond to Mr X because of delays in registering the complaint with the correct service.
21. Mr X remained unhappy and complained to us.
22. In response to my enquiry letter the Council confirmed Mr X has provided no further evidence or made any further reports which would warrant it taking any further action.

My findings

23. Mr X’s complaint to us is about how the Council responded to his complaints of ASB between May and July 2019 which he submitted to the Council in July 2019. The Council has no records of Mr X raising further reports of ASB with the Council since that date and Mr X has not provided me with information to the contrary. Therefore, I have only considered the Council’s response to the incidents he reported to the Council in July 2019.
24. The Council considered and provided a response to the incident log Mr X submitted in a timely manner. The incident log consisted of mainly noise complaints. Therefore, it was appropriate for the Council to refer Mr X to the noise team. It provided him with relevant information however Mr X declined to contact the noise team. The Council provided Mr X with advice about how to manage civil matters such as trespass on his land and how to prevent dogs from fouling on his lawn. The Council ASB team decided based on the information it had to take no further action but would consider further reports should Mr X submit them. The Council considered Mr X’s reports of ASB in line with its policy and there was no fault.
25. Mr X also complained about how the Council handled his request to record a meeting between him and the Council to discuss his complaint. The Council offered a meeting at its offices and considered his request to record the meeting. It decided to decline Mr X’s request and instead provided a written response to his complaint. There was no fault in that decision.
26. Mr X was unhappy with how the Council handled his complaint. The Council issued a Stage 1 and Stage 2 response. It also carried out an internal review. There was some delay in the Council responding to Mr X at stage 1 and stage 2. However, I do not deem the delays serious enough to warrant a finding of fault.

Back to top

Final decision

27. I completed my investigation as I have found no fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman