Summary: Mr X complained the Council allowed illegal drinking activity at a pub across the road from his home during the Covid-19 lockdown. We will not investigate this complaint, because it is unlikely we would find the Council at fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council did not act on his concerns a pub across the road from his home was holding illegal drinking activities during the Covid-19 lockdown. He also complained a Council officer spoke over him during a telephone call. These issues led to distress and anger.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. This complaint involves events that occurred during the Covid-19 pandemic. The Government introduced a range of new and frequently updated rules and guidance during this time. We can consider whether the council followed the relevant legislation, guidance and our published “Good Administrative Practice during the response to Covid-19”.
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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information Mr X provided when he complained to us.
5. I considered complaints correspondence the Council provided.
6. I considered Mr X’s comments on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. Mr X told the Council about drinking activity at a pub across the road from his home in June 2020, during the Covid-19 lockdown period. He says people were drinking in a decked area outside the pub, for several hours daily.
8. Mr X says when he spoke to a Council officer about this on the telephone, they spoke over him. He says the officer agreed the pub was acting illegally but made it clear they did not intend to take action. Mr X says the drinking, and the Council’s response, have significantly worsened his mental health.
9. Mr X made a formal complaint. The Council told Mr X its licensing team and the police had both verified the pub was closed to the public. The Council clarified the pub was not selling alcohol for consumption on its premises. It also explained the decked area attached to the pub was being used by members of the public, but not as part of the operation of the pub.
10. The Council explained its enforcement powers were only in relation to certain parts of the regulations. These related specifically to the closure of business premises, restricting businesses from opening or selling food and drink for consumption on the premises. The Council explained only the police could enforce restrictions on the movement of people and gatherings. (The Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) Regulations 2020, regulations 4, 5 and 8)
11. The Council explained to Mr X it had, however, spoken with the owner of the pub and persuaded them to temporarily prevent the decked area being used until 4 July, when the rules would change.
12. If we investigated this complaint, it is unlikely we would find the Council at fault. It correctly applied the legislation and because the pub was closed to members of the public and was not selling food or drink for consumption on its premises, the Council did not have any powers. It negotiated with the owner, which was appropriate. We cannot say now what happened during the telephone call Mr X complains about, and whether the officer spoke over Mr X.
13. Mr X refers to injustice caused to him by the people drinking at the pub being noisy and anti-social. However, this is not uncommon when living opposite a pub and this was not due to fault by the Council. It is open to Mr X to raise this issue with the Council’s anti-social behaviour officers if he would like this specific issue to be explored further. He has also raised a new issue relating to the decked area not having planning permission, and the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action about this should the pub’s owner decide not to submit a retrospective application. It is open to Mr X to complain to the Council, and then the Ombudsman, about this if he wishes to do so.

Back to top

Final decision

14. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman