Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to matters relating to Mr X’s reports of anti-social behaviour from a neighbour. This is because an investigation is unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council or lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, says he has been “fobbed off” by the Council which has failed to take appropriate action against the anti-social behaviour (ASB) of a neighbour and that it has just referred him to the police and his landlord, a housing association.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X, including the Council’s response to his complaint.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Dissatisfied with his landlord’s response to his reports of ASB from a neighbour, who is also a tenant of the same housing association, Mr X contacted the Council.
6. In response it arranged a phone conference with Mr X and his social worker. It looked into the issues Mr X had raised, contacted the housing association and Mr X’s GP and viewed CCTV footage. Having done so a further phone conference was arranged at which the Council explained that the threshold for action by the Council’s ASB Team had not been met as all matters had been addressed by the housing association and so no action by the Council would be taken.
7. In responding to Mr X’s complaint about this, the Council set out the nature of the ASB complained about and the action taken by the housing association. It told Mr X that he could report any instances of criminal behaviour to the police and if he was unhappy with the actions of his housing association, he could make a complaint to it and then the Housing Ombudsman.
8. While I understand Mr X has no faith in the police or the Housing Ombudsman helping him, I have seen no evidence to suggest there has been fault by the Council. It looked into the issues he raised and satisfied itself that the housing association has taken appropriate action. Mr X may disagree with this, but it is not our role to question decisions made by councils if they have followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information.
9. Mr X asked the Council to issue the neighbour with a letter about his behaviour which the Council declined to do as it did not consider it appropriate to do so. That Mr X received a letter in 2018 about his own behaviour does not mean the Council is obliged to issue a letter to the neighbour now. These are separate matters.
10. Mr X says the Council is bullying and prejudiced against him and that it has discriminated against him as a vulnerable person. However, I have seen no evidence to support this claim.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because an investigation is unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council or lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman