Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his reports of antisocial behaviour. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained that a Council Officer had not carried out their job properly in relation to antisocial behaviour he had experienced, and falsely accused him of antisocial behaviour. Mr X stated that this has had a negative impact on his physical and mental health. He would like an apology, for the Council Officer to be investigated, to have his antisocial behaviour warning removed and compensation from the Council.

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
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or

(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 Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X contacted the Council about the antisocial behaviour (ASB) of his neighbour. The Council, Housing Association and Police met with Mr X in winter 2024 to discuss the ASB incidents. Two months later, the Council issued Mr X’s neighbour an Antisocial Behaviour Warning.
6. Mr X asked the Council to arrange an ASB Case Review meeting. It held two in spring 2025. The meetings resulted in action plans for the agencies to explore options to help tackle the ASB.
7. In spring 2025, Mr X received an Antisocial Behaviour Warning following altercations with his neighbour.
8. Mr X complained. He said the Council:
• had not acted in response to his reports of ASB.
• had framed him with false allegations which led to him being issued with an Antisocial Behaviour Warning.
9. In the Council’s complaint response, it stated the case notes recorded the Officer had contacted Mr X, issued his neighbour an ASB warning and kept him updated about the next steps for tackling the ASB.
10. The Council stated it had held two ASB Case Review meetings, and a separate meeting in winter 2025 with Mr X to co-ordinate a response to the ASB.
11. The Council’s complaint response stated the Police had issued this warning after reports of harassment and video footage of the incidents had been reviewed.
12. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of Council fault to justify our involvement. The Council responded to Mr X’s reports of ASB, took action against his neighbour, arranged ASB Case review meetings, and worked with other organisations to try to resolve the matter.
13. In any case, Mr X stated that he wants the Council to remove his Antisocial Behaviour Warning to be removed. We cannot direct the Council to remove the warning,

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman