Cheshire East Council (25 022 149)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Antisocial behaviour 04-Jun-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s reports of noise. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and we could not achieve a worthwhile outcome for Mr X.

Norwich City Council (25 009 584)

Statement Upheld Antisocial behaviour 03-Jun-2026

Summary: The Council was at fault for delay dealing with Mr X’s neighbour’s fly-tipping and Mr X’s complaint. The Council apologised and made a payment. We are satisfied the Council remedied the injustice caused.

Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council (25 011 231)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Antisocial behaviour 27-May-2026

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

Forest of Dean District Council (25 017 572)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Antisocial behaviour 27-May-2026

Summary: We will not investigate part of Mr X’s complaint about antisocial behaviour because there is insufficient evidence of fault. We will not investigate matters that took place before September 2024 because the complaint is late. We will not investigate a delay in the Council’s complaint handling because the Council apologised and an investigation is unlikely to achieve anything further.

London Borough of Newham (25 021 267)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Antisocial behaviour 20-May-2026

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint regarding noise and antisocial behaviour within his building. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council. We also cannot add to the investigation already carried out by the Council.

London Borough of Bromley (25 010 419)

Statement Upheld Antisocial behaviour 14-May-2026

Summary: There was no fault in the way the Council investigated the complainants’ reports of anti-social behaviour (ASB) by their neighbours. However, the Council was at fault because it did not act upon a request for an ASB case review. It has agreed to apologise for this. The Council is also at fault because its case review policy includes an unlawful eligibility requirement. The Council has agreed to amend its policy, and provide guidance for staff about the ASB case review process.

Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (25 021 423)

Statement Upheld Antisocial behaviour 14-May-2026

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint alleging the Council failed to deal with her complaints of anti-social behaviour by a neighbour properly. This is because the Council has admitted fault in the complaints investigation and provided Mrs X with a proportionate remedy. We are unlikely to be able to add to the Council’s investigation.

London Borough of Waltham Forest (25 008 275)

Statement Upheld Antisocial behaviour 12-May-2026

Summary: Mr X complained on behalf of Ms Y and Mr Z about how the Council dealt with its investigation into complaints about an alleged noise disturbance from their property which was submitted by their neighbour. There was fault by the Council for its failure to decide whether a statutory noise nuisance existed. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.

Manchester City Council (25 019 795)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Antisocial behaviour 07-May-2026

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.

Bristol City Council (25 020 175)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Antisocial behaviour 07-May-2026

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has maintained a green space. There is not enough significant personal injustice to Mrs X to warrant investigation, and an investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome anyway.