Summary: Mrs B complained the Council has failed to address anti-social behaviour (ASB) that her daughter, Ms C, is experiencing. The Council was at fault. It failed to consider Ms C’s ASB reports and its full range of ASB powers, and decide whether it should take ASB enforcement action. Ms C suffered distress and frustration as a result. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms C, contact Ms C about the current ASB and decide what action it should take, and issue staff guidance.

The complaint

1. Mrs B has bought the complaint to us on behalf of Ms C. Mrs B complains the Council has failed to address long-term anti-social behaviour (ASB) that Ms C is experiencing from a resident in a neighbouring property.
2. Mrs B says Ms C feels at risk in her own home and the issue is affecting her mental health and daily life. She would like help from the Council to resolve the ASB.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
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 may investigate complaints made on behalf of someone else if they have given their consent. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(1), as amended)
6. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have investigated

7. Mrs B brought the complaint to us in February 2026. So, matters before February 2025 are late. However, I have exercised discretion to consider matters from Summer 2024, when Ms C reported the ASB to the Council. This is because Mrs B has told me about personal circumstances which I consider could have prevented both her and Ms C from being able to bring the complaint to us sooner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I read the complaint and spoke to Mrs B about it over the phone.
9. I considered evidence provided by Mrs B and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
10. Mrs B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Anti-social behaviour

11. Councils have a general duty to tackle anti-social behaviour (ASB). But ASB can take many different forms; and when someone reports a problem, councils should decide which of their powers is most suitable.
12. For example, they may approach a complaint as an environmental health issue, where the complaint is about noise or pollution, and/or using their powers under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.
13. The 2014 Act introduced six powers for agencies involved in tackling ASB. These are:

• the power to issue a community protection notice (CPN);
• the power to make a public spaces protection order (PSPO);
• the power to close premises for a set length of time;
• a civil injunction (a court order, which a council, or other agencies, can apply for);
• a criminal behaviour order (a court order made following a conviction); and
• the power for the police to disperse people from a specified area.

Back to top

What happened

14. This is a summary of events outlining key facts and it does not include everything that has happened in this case.
15. Ms C lives by a housing association property. Mrs B says Ms C has been experiencing ASB for roughly two years from the resident who lives there, who I will refer to as the perpetrator. Ms C first reported the ASB issues to the Council in Summer 2024. The Council told her it could consider noise nuisance such as loud music, but it was unable to deal with the ASB she had reported such as swearing and the use of racist language, and that this should be dealt with by the housing association.
16. In relation to the noise nuisance, the Council informed Ms C it had written to the perpetrator to advise noise complaints had been received and to ensure no further noise nuisance occurred. It also sent Ms C noise diary sheets to complete if the noise persisted. Ms C returned completed noise diary sheets to the Council, but the incidents she had noted pre-dated the Council’s letter. As such, the Council told her it could not use the diary sheets in considering whether it needed to take further action. It told Miss B this is because the diary sheets are to be true accounts of what has happened, and written at the time of the incident(s). The Council says it did not receive further diary sheets from Ms C following this or hear anything further. As such, it was assumed by the Council the noise nuisance had stopped and it took no further action.
17. Mrs B brought the complaint to us in February 2026 on behalf of Ms C. The Council told us it has not considered Ms C’s ASB reports because Mrs B and Ms C are not Council housing tenants and it is unable to consider the reports of ASB as the perpetrator is housed by a housing association who is dealing with the matter. In response to our draft decision, the Council says this accurately reflects its housing management department’s operational remit, which is limited to enforcement action within the Council’s own housing stock.

Back to top

Analysis

18. I have found no fault in how the Council considered and responded to Ms C’s reports of noise nuisance. However, I have concerns about the Council’s consideration of its full potential range of powers when dealing with ASB. The Council can investigate, and, where appropriate, has powers to take enforcement action against ASB by any person, regardless of their relationship with the Council.
19. The Council has not taken a broad view about the powers it has available to tackle ASB, as outlined in paragraphs 12 and 13. Rather, it took a departmentalised approach, and told Ms C it was unable to deal with the reports of ASB, and she should instead contact the Police or the perpetrator’s housing association. The Council’s failure to consider the ASB reports made by Ms C in 2024 and consider whether it should investigate and take action against the ASB using its range of powers, was fault. This caused Ms C distress and frustration.

Back to top

Action

20. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused to Ms C by the fault I have identified, the Council will take the following actions within four weeks of my final decision:
• Apologise to Ms C for its failure to consider her ASB reports and full range of ASB powers, and whether it should investigate and take action against it when this was first reported in 2024. This apology should be in line with our guidance Making an effective apology.
• Contact Mrs B or Ms C to ask for information about the current ASB Ms C is experiencing from the perpetrator. The Council should record this in writing and investigate the ASB issues Mrs B raises with it. The Council should then decide what ASB enforcement action it should take, if any, and implement this. The Council should keep Ms C informed throughout this process.
21. Within three months, the Council will share our findings on this case with relevant staff, along with guidance which outlines the Council’s ASB powers under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.
22. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

23. I uphold Mrs B’s complaint and find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman