Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with reports of antisocial behaviour or that a property is being used as an unlicenced House in Multiple Occupancy. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault leading to an injustice to the complainant.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about how the Council has dealt with his reports of anti-social behaviour at a property that is being used as an unlicenced House in Multiple Occupancy (HMO).

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, 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X reported instances of antisocial behaviour from a property including dogs barking, parking violations and noise from a vehicle using the road near his home. Mr X also raised concerns that the property was being used as an unlicenced HMO.
6. The Council carried out a visit to the property and did not witness any of the issues he raised and found no evidence that the property was being used as an unlicensed HMO. It did however provide advise to residents about noise levels and timeframes. The Council told Mr X that it cannot consider complaints about noisy vehicles using the highway as this is a matter for the police. It told Mr X how he can report other instances of ongoing anti-social behaviour to the Council online. The Council told Mr X that there are no restrictions on how many vehicles a household could have but advised him how he could report online if a driveway was being blocked.
7. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council has dealt with his concerns about anti-social behaviour. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. It has taken appropriate action in regard to his concerns and provided him with accurate information about what it can consider and how Mr X can raise further concerns.
8. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council has failed to take appropriate action against his report that the property in question is being used as an unlicenced HMO. This is because Mr X has not demonstrated that this matter has caused him a personal injustice and he has no consent to complain on behalf of anyone who has.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing him an injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman