Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s concerns about antisocial behaviour and safeguarding. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that he’s experienced antisocial behaviour from his co-tenants. He says that the Council has failed to safeguard him and to consider concerns around his unsuitable housing.

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 or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

(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. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with his reports of noise and anti-social behaviour because there is insufficient evidence of fault. The Council visited Mr X’s property to investigate his concerns about noise but found there was insufficient evidence to take enforcement action. The Council reviewed evidence Mr X provided in relation to anti-social behaviour and issued a verbal warning to all residents. It encouraged Mr X to make any further reports of anti-social behaviour to the police.
6. There is also insufficient evidence of fault with how the Council dealt with Mr X’s safeguarding concerns. The Council assessed his concerns under Section 42 of the Care Act 2014. It spoke with Mr X and considered other relevant information but concluded the threshold for intervention had not been met. The Council carried out a review, but the decision remained unchanged.
7. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with his homelessness application. The Council informed Mr X that it did not consider that he had a priority need and told him about the right of review. Therefore, it is reasonable for Mr X to have requested a review.
8. I will not investigate how the Council dealt with Mr X’s complaint about these matters. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman