Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not act on his reports of anti-social behaviour, noise nuisance and bonfire nuisance from his neighbour. We did not find evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council did not act on his reports of anti-social behaviour, noise nuisance and bonfire nuisance from his neighbour. He stated the Council have discriminated against him because he is not English.
2. Mr X stated the Council’s failure to act has caused him and his family distress and prevented them enjoying their home.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. 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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
6. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
7. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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

What I have and have not investigated

8. I have investigated Mr X’s concerns about the Council’s handling of his reports from June 2023 to the start of my investigation in August 2024.
9. I have not investigated Mr X’s concerns about matters which occurred before June 2023. These parts of Mr X’s complaint are late and there is not enough reason to accept those part of it for investigation now.
10. I have not investigated Mr X’s concerns about matters which have happened since he complained to the Ombudsman, or which were not part of his formal complaint to the Council. This is because of the restriction set out in paragraph 3.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

11. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
12. I set out my initial thoughts on the complaint in a draft decision statement and I considered Mr X’s comments in response.

Back to top

What I found

13. Under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA), councils have a duty to take reasonable steps to investigate potential ‘statutory nuisances’.
14. Activities a council might decide are a statutory nuisance include:

• noise from premises or vehicles, equipment or machinery in the street;
• smoke from premises;

15. For the issue to count as a statutory nuisance, it must:

• unreasonably and substantially interfere with the use or enjoyment of a home or other property; and/or
• injure health or be likely to injure health.

16. There is no fixed point at which something becomes a statutory nuisance. Councils rely on suitably qualified officers to gather evidence. Officers may, for example, ask the complainant to complete diary sheets, fit noise-monitoring equipment, or make site visits. Councils will sometimes offer an ‘out-of-hours’ service for people to contact, if a nuisance occurs outside normal working time.
17. Once evidence gathering is complete, a council will assess the evidence. It will consider matters such as the timing, duration, and intensity of the alleged nuisance. Officers will use their professional judgement to decide whether a statutory nuisance exists.
18. Councils can also decide to take informal action if the issue complained about is causing a nuisance, but is not a statutory nuisance. They may write to the person causing the nuisance or suggest mediation.

Section 82 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990

19. A member of the public can also take private action against an alleged nuisance in the magistrates’ court. If the court decides they are suffering a statutory nuisance, it can order the person or people responsible to take action to stop or limit it.
20. This process does not involve the council, but it is good practice for councils to tell complainants about their right to take private action.

Antisocial behaviour

21. Councils have a general duty to tackle anti-social behaviour (ASB). But ASB can take many different forms; and when someone reports a problem, councils should decide which of their powers is most suitable.
22. For example, they 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 cannot investigate the council’s actions as a social landlord); and/or
• using their powers under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.

23. The 2014 Act introduced six powers for agencies involved in tackling ASB. These are:

• the power to issue a community protection notice (CPN);
• the power to make a public spaces protection order (PSPO);
• the power to close premises for a set length of time;
• a civil injunction (a court order, which a council, or other agencies, can apply for);
• 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

24. Councils and the police can issue community protection notices (CPN) to prevent anti-social behaviour which is unreasonable and having a negative effect on the community's quality of life. A CPN requires the behaviour to stop and, where appropriate, require the recipient to take reasonable steps to stop it happening again. Not complying is an offence and may result in a fine or a fixed penalty notice.
25. Councils must issue a written warning in advance of a CPN. The council should decide how long after the written warning to wait before serving a CPN. A person can appeal a CPN in the magistrates' court within 21 days of receiving it if they disagree with the council’s decision.

What happened

26. This chronology provides an overview of key events. It is not intended to show everything that has happened.
27. Mr X reported incidents of ASB, noise nuisance and bonfire nuisance to the Council in 2021 and 2022.
28. In late November 2023 Mr X told the Council about noise nuisance from his neighbour shouting and from his dog barking. The Council sent Mr X diary sheets to complete so it could assess the problem.
29. Mr X returned completed diary sheets to the Council. The diary recorded incidents including:
• a dog barking for a few minutes
• spitting by his neighbour and his neighbour swearing at him
• loud music on one occasion.
30. On 21 December the Council told Mr X the incidents he recorded did not amount to a statutory nuisance. It told Mr X he could take his own action using section 82 of the EPA. It also offered to arrange mediation for Mr X and his neighbour to help resolve their ongoing disputes.
31. Unhappy with the Council’s response Mr X complained to the Council. He said it had not acted on his reports of nuisance from his neighbour despite him providing evidence, such as CCTV footage. He asked for a meeting with a senior officer to discuss his case.
32. In January 2024 Mr X told the Council about noise nuisance from his neighbour hitting the wall. He also told it about nuisance from his neighbour’s bonfires. He said his neighbour was running a waste business from his home.
33. In February Mr X made further reports to the Council about his neighbour burning trade waste.
34. The Council wrote to Mr X. It said it has referred his reports of his neighbour burning trade waste to its Environmental Enforcement team to investigate. It also sent his neighbour a letter about bonfire nuisance. However it explained this does not mean the bonfires amount to statutory nuisance and that it had closed his case.
35. It also told Mr X it had referred his concerns about harassment from his neighbour to the Community Safety Team.
36. Unhappy Mr X continued to complain about the Council’s decision not to take further action. He told it about further incidents of his noise nuisance from his neighbour.
37. On 29 February the Council wrote to Mr X explaining that if he is unhappy with its handling of his reports about nuisance from his neighbour, he can request an ASB case review.
38. In March Mr X requested an ASB review.
39. Mr X continued to report incidents of noise nuisance, bonfire nuisance and harassment from his neighbour throughout March.
40. In April the ASB case review panel considered Mr X’s request for an ASB case review. It found:
• the Council’s noise nuisance team had received many reports from Mr X and he had completed noise diaries. However these did not demonstrate a statutory nuisance was occurring.
• the Council’s Environmental Enforcement team were dealing with reports of waste burning.
• the Police have a live investigation regarding Mr X’s reports of harassment by his neighbour.

It said it would not conduct an ASB case review as Mr X’s case did not meet the criteria. It told him how to request a secondary review if he was unhappy with the decision.

41. Mr X continued to report incidents of noise nuisance, bonfire nuisance, his neighbour’s dog straying and harassment from his neighbour throughout April and May.
42. Meanwhile the Police investigated Mr X’s reports of harassment from his neighbour.
43. In May the Council met with Mr X at his home to discuss his noise nuisance reports. Following the meeting the Council wrote to him explaining it could not take further action as there was insufficient evidence of a statutory nuisance. It reiterated Mr X can take his own action under section 82 of the EPA.
44. The Council also told Mr X that it would continue to investigate his reports of bonfire nuisance.
45. Unhappy with the Council’s actions Mr X made a new complaint about the Council failing to act against his neighbour.
46. The Council told Mr X that it would not consider his complaint. It said if he was unhappy with the Council’s actions he could request a secondary ASB review of his case. Mr X did so.
47. In June the Council issued his neighbour with a Community Protection Warning in relation to bonfires at his home and his dog straying.
48. Throughout June Mr X told the Council about bonfires at his neighbour’s home and his neighbour’s dog being outside without a leash.
49. In July the Council told Mr X it could not take further action regarding the bonfires unless it witnessed the nuisance. It closed this part of Mr X’s case.
50. Also in July the ASB case review panel meet to discuss Mr X’s request for a secondary review of its earlier decision. The review panel found the criteria for a review were not met. It said the Council had responded to Mr X’s reports and reviewed evidence he provided.
51. In late July the Council issued Mr X’s neighbour with a Community Protection Notice for allowing his dog to stray from his home.
52. Meanwhile Mr X made another complaint about the Council not acting on his reports of nuisance from his neighbour. The Council said it would not investigate his complaint further as doing so would not result in a different outcome. It said it could only act when there was sufficient evidence of a statutory nuisance. It referred Mr X to complain to the Ombudsman. Mr X did so.

Finding

53. In response to Mr X’s reports about his neighbour’s behaviour the Council has:
• acknowledged his reports;
• considered the information in his completed diary sheets and other evidence he provided including CCTV footage;
• visited his home to help gather evidence and verify his reports of nuisance;
• issued his neighbour with a Community Protection Warning and Community Protection Notice; and
• considered its handling of his case via its ASB case review process.
54. I am satisfied the Council took appropriate steps to find out if Mr X’s reports amounted to a statutory nuisance. Where it had sufficient evidence, the Council issued Mr X’s neighbour with a Community Protection Warning and a Community Protection Notice.
55. For the above reasons I do not find fault by the Council. Without evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision, we cannot question the outcome of its investigation into Mr X’s reports.
56. Mr X stated the Council has not acted against his neighbour because he is not English. I have found no evidence the Council has discriminated against Mr X. As set out above the Council has properly considered his reports.

Back to top

Final Decision

57. I have completed my investigation. I did not find evidence of fault by the Council.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman