Summary: Mr X complained the Council acted inappropriately when it issued him with a community protection notice for anti-social behaviour. We found fault because there was an issue with the Council’s wording on the notice. This caused Mr X avoidable distress, frustration and uncertainty. To remedy the injustice caused, the Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to him.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council lacked relevant evidence and overstepped its powers when deciding to issue him with a community protection notice for anti-social behaviour, which it then later revoked before his appeal was heard in court.
2. Mr X says this caused him avoidable distress and frustration.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered information provided by both Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Mr X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I have taken any comments received into consideration before reaching my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Community protection notices

7. A community protection notice (CPN) is a legal notice issued to individuals, businesses, or organisations. It is designed to stop them from engaging in persistent, unreasonable anti-social behaviour that has a detrimental effect on the community's quality of life. CPNs can be issued by either a council or the police.
8. Before issuing a CPN, a council must first issue a community protection warning (CPW). This describes the unacceptable behaviour and explains a CPN may be issued if matters continue.
9. If a CPN is then issued, the recipient has the right to appeal it to the Magistrates’ Court within 21 days.

What happened

10. I have set out below a summary of the key events. This is not meant to show everything that happened.
11. The Council’s officer, Officer J, issued Mr X with a CPW in spring 2024. The CPW listed four anti-social behaviours that must change or stop with immediate effect.
12. Officer J then issued Mr X with a CPN a short while later. The CPN repeated the four original behaviours but also added two more making the list six in total.
13. Mr X was unhappy with the CPN being issued and the stated reasons why the Council had done so. He appealed it using his right to do so at the Magistrates’ Court.
14. At the beginning of March 2025 and before the case had been heard at court, Officer J wrote to Mr X to say the Council had revoked the CPN. Officer J said to contact her if he wanted to discuss the matter.
15. When Mr X asked, Officer J said the CPN had been revoked as there had been an alternative solution presented that was not available at the time the CPN was issued.
16. Mr X then complained to the Council about how and why the original CPN had been issued. He said Officer J had been overzealous and had overstepped her powers. Mr X questioned why the CPN had been revoked and what the alternative solution was which Officer J had mentioned.
17. The Council’s stage one complaint response said that following the appeal lodged by Mr X’s solicitors, the Council took legal advice and made the decision to revoke the CPN. It said this was done due to ‘technical issues with the wording of the notice and consideration was given to whether taking action by issuing a CPN was the most appropriate method to deal with the anti-social behaviour.’
18. The Council also said CPWs and CPNs were all reviewed by a lead officer to ensure adequate evidence was there to proceed with any form of enforcement. It said it did not accept the anti-social behaviour did not occur and taking enforcement action was proportionate to the evidence available.
19. Unhappy with this, Mr X escalated his complaint. The Council’s stage two response was sent at the end of April 2025. It repeated much of the original response and confirmed the reasons for revoking the CPN. It said it acknowledged the process had resulted in distress for him and regretted any inconvenience caused. The Council said processes had been reviewed to ensure officers are equipped to take the best course of action when dealing with such matters and that regular training took place to maintain appropriate standards.
20. The Council signposted Mr X to us.

Analysis

21. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. I acknowledge there was a legal method through which Mr X was able to appeal the original CPN and which he used.
22. The Council stated all CPWs and CPNs are reviewed by a lead officer. However, the Council then revoked the CPN due in part to issues with how it had been worded.
23. Whilst the Council was entitled to issue the CPN, I am satisfied its confirmation the notice was incorrectly worded leads me to a finding of fault on its part. This caused avoidable distress, frustration and uncertainty to Mr X. I have made a recommendation below to remedy the injustice caused. As the Council has already taken steps to review its processes, I will make no further recommendations linked to this aspect.

Back to top

Agreed action

24. To remedy the injustice caused by the fault I have identified, the Council will take the following action within four weeks of the date of my final decision:
• apologise to Mr X for the identified injustice; and
• pay Mr X £150 to recognise the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused by the identified injustice.
25. The apology written should be in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies on making an effective apology.
26. Payments made are in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies.
27. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

28. I have now completed my investigation. I uphold this complaint with a finding of fault causing an injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman