Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to reports of noise nuisance. This is because any investigation by us is unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Miss X was unhappy with the Council’s response to reports of noise from a nearby property. She said the Council did not respond when it said it had and failed to take effective action. She said it should have issued an abatement notice on the property causing the noise.
2. Miss X said this affected her enjoyment of her home.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
4. 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 continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council’s case notes.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Between April 2024 and February 2025, Miss X made numerous reports to the Council about noise nuisance from a nearby property. She said this often occurred late at night and went on for several hours at a time.
8. The Council provided me with its case notes for the relevant period. It also sent me copies of the complaint correspondence.
9. The Council website sets out how it responds to reports of noise nuisance. It says it takes a step-by-step approach to reports of noise; including contacting the property owners where the noise is occurring, asking a complainer to keep a diary of events, officer visits to the property and consideration of using noise monitoring equipment (NME).
10. Based on the case notes available, the Council responded to each of Miss X’s separate reports and incrementally responded to these in line with its policy, which included all the factors I have highlighted above. It also initially decided the noise was not a statutory noise nuisance and that is a decision it able to take.
11. If the Council has properly followed its policy and made a decision, without any obvious flaw, we cannot criticise its actions. Therefore, even if we were to investigate Miss X’s complaint further, it is unlikely we would find fault.
12. The Council also apologised to Miss X that a caseworker did not respond to her in a timely way, early on in her noise complaints and that is an appropriate response.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman