Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a street trader’s permit application in 2018. This part of his complaint is late. We will also not investigate the Council’s response to his more recent reports of the trader’s nuisance. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council approved a food van’s street trading permit in 2018 and the van has since caused nuisance near his home. He says this is a health and safety risk to him and his children, affecting their enjoyment of their home and causing him stress. He wants the Council to acknowledge its fault handling the permit application, investigate the nuisance, move the van, and address the environmental hazards.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about matters arising before October 2024 because this part of his complaint is late. Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to approve an application seven years before he approached us and its handling of his nuisance complaints since then. There is no good reason to exercise discretion to investigate matters arising more than 12 months before he approached us. Mr X could have approached us sooner if he was unhappy with the Council's actions at that time.
7. In August 2025, Mr X complained to the Council the food van was attracting rats near his home. He also complained about noise and smoke from the van. He asked the Council to investigate, address the rat problem, and remove the van’s trading permit.
8. In its response, the Council said its Environmental Health team was investigating Mr X’s complaint and had visited the site several times, including in the evening at his request. It said it had asked Mr X to provide the photos, videos and audio recordings of the nuisance he said he had. The Council said it could investigate further and arrange targeted visits once it received this. We will not investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions so far to justify investigating. It is open to Mr X to provide the additional evidence to the Council so it can complete its investigation.
9. The Council said it can consider revoking a street trading permit, or imposing more conditions, if the trader causes significant issues including statutory nuisance. It explained it had not changed or cancelled the permit because it did not find the food van was causing significant issues based on Mr X’s complaint and its site visits. We will not investigate this part of the complaint. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision making to justify investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. Part of it is late and there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating the Council’s more recent handling of his complaints about nuisance.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman