Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that the complainant’s neighbour is maintaining their property to an adequate standard. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the reports of anti-social behaviour. Also, the actions of the Council as landlord are outside our jurisdiction.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council has failed to act on her repeated reports that her neighbour is failing to clear dog mess from their garden.
2. She says she wants the Council to:
• enforce the terms of its tenancy
• check the environment is safe for the neighbour’s dog; and
• provide her with financial compensation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider.

(Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)

5. 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 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. As explained in paragraph four above, we cannot look at the Council’s actions as landlord.
9. However, we have considered the Council’s actions following Ms X’s reports of anti-social behaviour (ASB) by her neighbour.
10. The Council confirms it has visited the neighbour more than 15 times in the past two years. Some of the visits were unannounced. The Council’s dog warden also visited the property.
11. The Council is satisfied the neighbour is maintaining their garden to a satisfactory standard.
12. We can look at the Council’s decision-making process but we can’t say if the decision is right or wrong. The Council should take account of law, policy, relevant evidence and information. If it has followed those steps we cannot find fault.
13. I understand Ms X is unhappy and has provided photographs which she says shows dog waste in her neighbour’s garden. However, the Council has sent officers to visit her neighbour multiple times and are satisfied with the way they are maintaining their property. Also the dog warden has not raised any concerns.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council responded to Ms X’s reports of ASB by her neighbour.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman