Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council did not respond to his reports of Anti-Social Behaviour. This is because the complaint is late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to investigate it now.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council did not respond to his reports of anti-social behaviour (ASB). He said his complaints were ignored and it put him in danger.
2. He said the Council failed to provide him with CCTV to keep him safe. He wants the Council to admit fault and provide a larger sum of compensation than already offered.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. We will not investigate this complaint. Mr X became aware of the issue in 2023 when he first complained to the Council. We expect a person to complain to us within 12 months of being aware of a matter and Mr X did not complain to us until 2025. Therefore, the complaint is late, and there is no good reason to exercise discretion to consider it now.
9. The more time passes between the events and a complaint, the more unlikely it is we can investigate them effectively, gather reliable evidence and reach a sound decision. In older cases we also may not be able to achieve a meaningful remedy because too many circumstances have changed. We are often unable to be able to show why events occurred or understand who was responsible.
10. However, even if the complaint was not late, we would be unlikely to investigate. In the Council’s complaint response, it apologised for its service failures and delays. It also apologised for providing Mr X with wrong advice about the Council’s Noise and Nuisance team’s service.
11. The Council identified a service improvement and said it reviewed its process to ensure all team members engaging with residents are well informed about services, especially in relation to ASB.
12. The Council explained to Mr X that it recommended Mr X’s landlord install CCTV in communal areas. However, the landlord had chosen not to proceed with the recommendation.
13. Due to its identified failings, and the distress caused to Mr X, the Council offered a compensation payment of £500. The Council’s response to Mr X’s complaint remedies the injustice caused; therefore, it would not be proportionate for us to investigate further.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is late and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to investigate it now.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman