Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to address anti-social behaviour taking place at Mr X’s next door neighbour’s home. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to result in a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council has failed to take enforcement action against his next-door neighbour who is engaging in anti-social behaviour.

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:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(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 has been complaining to the Council about anti-social behaviour taking place at his next-door neighbour’s home since 2024.
6. In September 2025 the Council installed noise monitoring equipment at his home and asked Mr X to complete noise diary sheets. The Council did not find the noise recorded constituted a statutory nuisance.
7. Mr X complained about the Council’s response and a 4-month delay in keeping him updated on the situation. The Council acknowledged a change in staff caused a delay processing Mr X’s reports of noise nuisance and it apologised. The Council offered to install noise recording equipment again, but Mr X declined this.
8. The evidence shows there was fault in the Council allowing the situation to drift and in failing to respond to Mr X for several months. However, this fault did not cause Mr X a significant injustice as the Council did not find evidence of a statutory nuisance. The Council offered to install noise recording equipment again and Mr X did not accept this. This was Mr X’s choice, but the Council has attempted to investigate the matter in the way we would expect. We cannot hold the Council responsible because Mr X chose not to engage. An investigation into this matter would be unlikely to result in a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because an investigation would be unlikely to result in a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman