Summary: Ms T complains that the Council has not taken the necessary action to address her concerns about anti-social behaviour from a café near to her home. She says this is having a negative effect on her life and her property has been targeted by the perpetrators. We find fault because the Council did not signpost Ms T to the community trigger process, even though it should have for the number of reports of anti-social behaviour made by Ms T.

The complaint

1. Ms T complains the Council has not taken action regarding anti-social behaviour that is occurring at a café near to her home.
2. She says this has had a negative effect on her life and she has been targeted by the perpetrators.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
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 read the complaint and the Council’s responses.
6. I spoke with Ms T on the telephone about the complaint.
7. I made enquiries of the Council.
8. I invited Ms T and the Council to comment on a draft decision and considered nay comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Council’s powers to deal with anti-social behaviour

9. Councils have a general duty to take action to tackle anti-social behaviour (ASB). ASB can take many different forms; councils should make informed decisions about which of their powers is most appropriate for any given situation.
10. For example, councils may approach a complaint:

• as an environmental health issue, where the complaint is about noise or pollution;
• as a planning matter, where the complaint is about an inappropriate use of a building or facility;
• as a licensing matter, where the complaint is about a licensed premises, such as a pub or nightclub;
• as part of their duties as a social landlord, where the alleged perpetrator is a council tenant (although we are unable to investigate the council’s actions as a social landlord); or
• using their powers under the ‘Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act’ 2014.

11. The 2014 Act introduced six new powers for agencies involved in tackling ASB:

• the power to issue community protection notices (CPN);
• the power to make a public spaces protection order (PSPO);
• the power to close premises for a specified period of time;
• a civil injunction (a court order, which can be made upon application by the local authority or other agencies);
• a criminal behaviour order (a court order made following a conviction); and
• the power for the police to disperse people from a specified area.

Community Protection Notices

12. Councils and the police can issue Community Protection Notices (CPN) to prevent anti-social behaviour which is having a negative effect on the community's quality of life, and which they decide is unreasonable. CPNs require the behaviour to stop and, where appropriate, require the recipient to take reasonable steps to ensure it is not repeated. Failure to comply is an offence and may result in a fine or a fixed penalty notice.
13. Councils must issue a written warning in advance of the CPN. It is for the person issuing the written warning to decide how long is appropriate before serving a CPN. A CPN can be appealed in the Magistrates' Court within 21 days by the recipient if they disagree with the council’s decision.
14. A council may issue a CPN while it is investigating whether the behaviour is a statutory nuisance. Issue of a CPN does not affect the council’s obligation to serve an abatement notice under Part 3 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, where the relevant test is met.

Community Trigger

15. The Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 introduced a mechanism to review the handling of complaints of anti-social behaviour (ASB). This is commonly known as the ‘Community Trigger’ process. When a person requests a review, relevant bodies (which may include the council, police and others) should decide whether the local threshold has been met.
16. If the threshold has been met, the relevant bodies should undertake the review. They should share information, consider what action has already been taken, decide whether more should be done, and then inform the complainant of the outcome. If they decide to take more action, they should create an action plan. It is for relevant local bodies to agree their review threshold, but the ASB statutory guidance says this should be, at a maximum, that a complainant has made three reports of ASB within six months.
17. We can only consider councils’ actions in an ASB case review. Any contribution made by other relevant bodies, such as the police, is not in the LGSCO’s jurisdiction.

What happened

18. Between May and November 2021, Ms T complained to the Council, Police and local councillors on at least nine separate occasions reporting ASB related issues originating from the café near to her home.
19. These included reports of noise disturbances late into the evening, oil being thrown at her door on multiple occasions and trading from vans outside the café, amongst other incidents.
20. Ms T also supplied some videos of people gathering on a street.
21. The Council responded on most occasions that it was undertaking daily monitoring of the café, but its inspectors work a day shift, and any incidents outside of that time could be reported to the police as well.
22. The Council said it had not observed any ASB that required action to be taken.
23. No one has been identified as a perpetrator of the ASB Ms T has reported.
24. In response to our enquiries, the Council said it does not have a specific policy in relation to ASB in general, and the policies it does have mostly relate to housing residents.
25. The Council did not signpost Ms T to the community trigger process in any of the documents it has supplied to the Ombudsman.
26. The Council’s website contains information about the community trigger process.

Analysis

27. The Council has been taking action to look into reports of ASB by Ms T and I do not find fault with how it addressed each complaint. It carried out daily monitoring and no one has been identified as a perpetrator of any ASB. However, it should have signposted Ms T to the community trigger process due to the number of ASB reports she made between May 2021 and November 2021. To not do so was fault.
28. I also note the Council does not have a specific policy in how to deal with this type of incident and it should have such a policy to help prevent similar incidents.

Back to top

Agreed action

29. To remedy the injustice caused to Ms T, the Council will apologise and invite Ms T to activate the community trigger within one month of our final decision.
30. The Council will also write and publish a policy about how to deal with general incidents of ASB. This policy should include when it should signpost someone to the community trigger process. This should be completed within three months on a final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

31. We have completed our investigation with a finding of fault causing injustice for the reasons explained in this statement. The actions we have recommended are an appropriate remedy for Ms T’s complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman