Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council did not appropriately deal with a nuisance complaint made against him in a fair and balanced manner. This is because an investigation would not lead to any further findings or outcomes.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council did not appropriately deal with a nuisance complaint made against him in a fair and balanced manner. He says the Council failed to tell him that a nuisance notice was to be issued against him and says the notice was biased against him.

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 an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. In August 2023, the Council sent Mr X a letter which detailed that a complaint had been received against him regarding loud music. The letter detailed that measure may be taken to reduce the disturbance to his neighbours and also detailed what action the Council may take to investigate, and what steps could be taken if the complaint was found to be justified.
6. A council officer spoke with Mr X about the letter he received and explained the purpose of the letter was to inform Mr X about the complaint and the next steps the Council will take. The Council wrote to Mr X in September 2023 to further explain its position and confirmed the letter sent in August 2023 was to set out the alleged noise nuisance and the next steps the Council will take to investigate the concerns. The Council also confirmed the intention of the letter is to inform and give the person subject to the complaint the opportunity to provide their comments.
7. In November 2023, the Council issued a final warning letter. This letter detailed the Council had investigated and that a statutory nuisance may exist. However, further investigations were needed. The letter also detailed what formal action the Council may take if a statutory nuisance was established.
8. In its complaint responses, the Council acknowledged and apologised for the distress suffered by Mr X followed receipt of the two letters. The Council again reconfirmed the purpose of the letters was to provide information about the complaint and the steps the Council would take to investigate the complaints. The Council confirmed the letters were standard templates.
9. The Council also acknowledged the wording of the second letter heightened the situation further and could have been written in a more explanatory and advisory way. The Council noted it would review the content of its letter templates to ensure they were fit for purpose.
10. The Council does have a legal duty to take reasonable steps to investigate the noise nuisance complaint it received to decide if a statutory nuisance exists. Therefore, we are not likely to find fault with the Council for sending the letters as it was appropriate for the Council to make Mr X aware of the complaint and the next steps the Council would be taking to investigate.
11. Further, the evidence shows the Council explained to Mr X several times the reason and intention behind the letters sent to him. This includes a conversation with an officer very soon after the first letter was sent in August 2023. I am satisfied with the action taken here as the Council provided Mr X with information to clarify its position and the reasons for the letters.
12. There is also evidence to support the Council was not acting in a biased manner against Mr X specifically because the Council made it clear it had to investigate and gather evidence before it could decide if a statutory nuisance exists. Therefore, an investigation is not justified as it would not lead to any further findings.
13. Finally, the Council has accepted the letters caused Mr X distress and provided an appropriate apology to Mr X for this. The Council has also recognised that an improvement can be made to its letter templates and committed to reviewing these. Therefore, an investigation is also not justified as it would not lead to any further recommendations.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because an investigation would not lead to any further findings or outcomes.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman