Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about impact of a fitness club on his property and the local area. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council dealt with Mr X’s concerns to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about how the Council responded to his concerns about a fitness club (the Club) located near his property. Mr X rents the property to tenants. He said his tenants were experiencing noise nuisance and vibrations caused by the activity at the Club. He said the vibrations were also causing structural damage to his property. He questioned the Council about the licensing arrangements for the Club. He asked if the Council had completed appropriate checks including fire and health and safety.
2. Mr X also raised concerns around the impact that people using the Club were having on parking. He said vehicles regularly obstructed pavements.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

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. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council considered noise nuisance and the associated vibrations at the Club.
7. After Mr X contacted the Council about the Club, the Council wrote to the Club about Mr X’s concerns. It also sent Mr X diary sheets asking him to record any nuisance experienced. Mr X has not provided any evidence of noise nuisance. Without this, the Council cannot determine whether a nuisance exists or not. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council dealt with Mr X’s complaint to justify our involvement. In addition, Mr X does not live in the property near the Club. Therefore, he is not directly affected by any nuisance caused by Club and as such, has not been caused a significant injustice.
8. In respect of Mr X’s complaint vibrations had caused structural damage to his property, the Council explained that was a private matter between him and the Club. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council responded to that concern. If would be appropriate for Mr X to seek independent legal advice if he believes the Club is liable for damage to his property.
9. In the Council’s final complaint response to Mr X, it answered several questions Mr X had asked about the licensing of the Club and operational arrangements. The Council confirmed it did not issue an operational licence for the Club. It directed Mr X to the fire service for information around the Club’s fire safety checks. It said it would not provide Mr X any details of the Club’s ownership as it was not permitted too. Although Mr X is unhappy with the Council’s response to the questions, there is no evidence of fault in how it has considered his concerns and it has provided appropriate signposting where relevant.
10. We will also not investigate Mr X’s complaint about parking issues related to the Club. Again, Mr X does not live in the area, so is not directly affected, therefore he has no significant injustice. In addition, the Council asked Mr X to provide details of the parking issues he was experiencing, including dates and times, so it could monitor his complaint. Mr X has not provided that information. It was reasonable for the Council to ask Mr X for additional information so it could properly assess the impact. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman