Summary: We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his noise nuisance reports. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains about the Council’s handling of noise nuisance from a neighbouring property. He says the noise has caused him physical and mental exhaustion which is affecting his work. He wants the Council to investigate and take action to stop the noise.

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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. When someone reports a problem with anti-social behaviour (ASB), councils should decide which of their powers is most suitable. For example, they may approach a complaint as an environmental health issue, where the complaint is about noise or pollution.
6. Under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA), councils have a duty to take reasonable steps to investigate potential ‘statutory nuisances’. Activities a council might decide are a statutory nuisance include noise from premises. Officers will use their professional judgement to decide whether a statutory nuisance exists based on the evidence they gather.
7. Councils can also decide to take informal action if the issue complained about is causing a nuisance, but is not a statutory nuisance. They may write to the person causing the nuisance or suggest mediation.
8. Mr Y is a homeowner and complains about noise from people living in a neighbouring property. The Council say this property is privately rented.
9. In its response to Mr Y’s complaint, the Council said its Anti-social Behaviour and Private Housing Services teams had considered his noise nuisance reports, including audio and video recordings. It assessed the noise as ordinary domestic noise. It said it would not attend the property or take enforcement action because the noise did not amount to statutory nuisance under the EPA.
10. The Council explained other actions it had taken in response to Mr Y’s noise reports. For example, it said it:

• Contacted the neighbouring property tenants and landlord to remind them of their responsibilities and explore options to reduce any noise disturbance.
• Assessed whether the neighbouring property met housing standards and found it did.
• Offered to carry out an informal sound insulation test.
• Signposted Mr Y to the option of taking private legal action about the noise.

11. We will not investigate this complaint. It appears the Council has reviewed Mr Y’s noise reports and evidence and explained why it will not take enforcement action. It has also explained other steps it has taken to address the disturbance and to advise Mr Y on options for his independent action. Although I accept Mr Y does not agree with the Council’s decision, there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s handling of this matter to justify investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman