Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council handled his complaint about noise from his neighbours. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about how the Council responded to his complaint about nuisance noise from his neighbours. He also complains about poor complaint handling. He says his parents cannot sleep and he cannot work from home.

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 normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complained to the Council about noise from his neighbours. He also raised concerns about the suitability of the property, and the actions of the landlord.
7. The Council said it had taken proper steps to investigate the concerns Mr X raised. It said it could not share the tenant’s information with him. It said it would do visits to gather information which it would consider alongside the diaries provided by Mr X.
8. I will not investigate this complaint. Based on the information the Council has provided about its investigation, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation by the Ombudsman.
9. Mr X asked for detailed information about the tenant and the Council refused to provide this. Mr X felt this was dismissive. The Council cannot share the tenant’s information with Mr X without their consent, and it told Mr X this.
10. The Information Commissioner’s Office is best placed to consider complaints about how organisations handle people’s data and respond to requests for information. There is not a good reason for us to consider the matter instead.
11. Mr X has complained about how the Council responded to his complaint. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman