Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to take into account the particular vulnerabilities of Mr X’s family in deciding there are no grounds for enforcement action against his neighbours under statutory nuisance legislation. This is because there is no evidence to suggest fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, says the Council should make reasonable adjustments and take into account the particular vulnerabilities of his family members in deciding whether a statutory noise nuisance exists as a result of noise from his neighbours.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complained to the Council about noise nuisance from his neighbours which affects his family. The Council investigated and installed noise monitoring equipment. However, its investigations did not show there was a significant level of noise that could be classed as a statutory noise nuisance under the relevant Environmental Protection legislation and said that what was heard was everyday living noise.
7. Mr X says in deciding whether or not the noise meets the statutory definition of a nuisance, the Council should consider the impact the noise is having on his family members who have a particular vulnerability.
8. However, statutory nuisance law cannot take into account the particular sensitivities of Mr X’s family members because the law requires councils to consider the average person. This is disappointing for Mr X, but the Council’s failure to take into account his family members’ vulnerabilities in deciding whether there is a statutory nuisance is not evidence of fault.
9. Mr X queries why the Council has offered to consider moving his family to a larger property rather than meeting its obligations to make reasonable adjustments in its policy and to take into account how the noise is affecting his family. However, the Council’s response to try and resolve matters for Mr X is explained by the legal position in relation to statutory nuisance described in the paragraph above.
10. Social housing tenancy issues and action taken by councils in relation to them fall outside our jurisdiction and cannot be investigated by our office. Instead, they fall within the jurisdiction of the Housing Services Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no evidence to suggest fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman