Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of reports of neighbour anti-social behaviour (ASB). This is because an investigation is unlikely to add to that already carried out by the Council or lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, says the Council led him to believe officers who visited his home were coming to talk about his reports of ASB by his neighbours rather than to discuss the reports received about his own behaviour. He says his mental health has suffered and he incurred a financial loss in having to deal with the situation.

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, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. In 2021 Mr X made complaints to the Council about some of his neighbours and some of them made complaints about him. Officers visited him at home and discussed these matters with him.
6. Some months later Mr X complained to the Council about the meeting and the behaviour of the officers who had visited. The Council addressed the issues he had raised and apologised if it had not been made clear enough to him that the reports of ASB it had received about him would be discussed. However, it did not uphold his complaint.
7. It said it had attempted to look at the overall situation and the root cause of conflict to try and seek a resolution. It had considered his reports of ASB but had concluded the matters raised were either for the police or did not constitute ASB at a level which would require action by the Council. It confirmed Mr X could report any future incidents of ASB and it would make a decision as to whether further action was required.
8. While Mr X may be disappointed by the Council’s response, an investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to add to the Council’s own investigation or lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because an investigation is unlikely to add to that already carried out by the Council or lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman