Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to take action since August 2024 in response to the complainant’s reports of nuisance and anti-social behaviour by a neighbour. There is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to take action in response to his reports of nuisance activities and anti-social behaviour (ASB) by his neighbour since August 2024.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We can 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. So, 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
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

3. With regard to the first bullet point, we can 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered:
• information provided by Mr X and the Council about his reports of nuisance/ASB since August 2024 onwards.
• the Ombudsman’s decision on Mr X’s complaint about nuisance/ASB prior to August 2024.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. I appreciate Mr X remains unhappy that the Council has not taken further action against his neighbour.
6. But the Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
7. I find there is insufficient evidence of fault, in the way the Council has considered and responded to Mr X’s concerns since August 2024, to warrant the Ombudsman starting an investigation. In reaching this view I am mindful that:
• The Ombudsman previously concluded there was insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council responded to Mr X’s reports of nuisance and ASB prior to August 2024.
• In response to our recent enquiries, the Council reiterated it had previously investigated Mr X’s reports about the neighbour banging on walls/shouting, a dog barking, and bonfires, but it was unable to substantiate that a statutory nuisance existed. Unless it can be demonstrated that there has been a significant change in the above-mentioned incidents occurring, then it will not pursue them further.
• Both Mr X and his neighbour have been offered mediation, but neither agreed to a referral being made.
• The Council has also advised Mr X to contact the Police in relation to the neighbour shouting expletives and causing damage to property.
• The Council has informed Mr X how he can take his own action against the neighbour using the powers in section 82 of the Environmental Protection Act.
• The Council has acknowledged Mr X reported a new type of alleged nuisance (DIY noise) in July 2025, and has asked him to complete and return noise diaries, so it can assess whether this amounts to a statutory nuisance.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council in the way it has responded to his concerns since August 2024.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman