Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to take sufficient action against an ice cream van operator for breaches of their licence conditions. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council or to show its actions caused the injustice Miss X claims.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council did not do enough to stop the operator of an ice cream van from playing their chimes after 7pm. Her son has autism and she claims the operator is harassing her. She believes this is a hate crime. She says that as a result of the noise she had to spend more than £400 on ear plugs and noise cancelling headphones for her son.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. While the Council licences ice cream van operators we cannot hold it responsible for the actions of every operator in its area. Miss X provided the Council with evidence of the ice cream van operator playing their chimes after 7pm and the Council wrote to them to remind them of the terms of their licence.
6. Miss X believes the Council should have done more but it is for the Council to decide what action to take. Playing chimes after 7pm is unlikely, on its own, to amount to sufficient reason to revoke the operator’s licence so the Council took the action it seemed appropriate to deal with the issue and I have not seen enough evidence of fault in this approach to warrant further investigation.
7. I must also take into account that even if the Council was at fault for its handling of Miss X’s complaint about the ice cream van operator we could not say this directly resulted in the costs Miss X claims. This is because Miss X’s partner has previously complained about other sources of noise leading to the need for these items and Miss X’s complaint refers to noise from the ice cream van generally and not just the playing of chimes after 7pm. So while the alleged breach of the licence may have contributed to the need for ear plugs and noise cancelling headphones it is not the sole reason for Miss X’s purchase of these items.
8. In addition to the licencing issues Miss X’s complaints refers to claims of harassment, breaches of the Equality Act and hate crimes. She says she has reported the ice cream van operator to the Police for these issues and the Police are better placed to consider how to deal with them.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council or to show its actions caused the injustice Miss X claims.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman