Noise


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Stoke-on-Trent City Council (20 001 378)

    Statement Not upheld Noise 27-Nov-2020

    Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council's actions in relation to her noise nuisance reports and complaints against her neighbour. The Ombudsman finds no fault with the Council's actions.

  • Birmingham City Council (20 000 991)

    Statement Upheld Noise 25-Nov-2020

    Summary: Mr B complains the Council has not dealt properly with his complaints about noise and disturbance. The Council is at fault because it did not investigate Mr B's initial complaints and has not taken the action it said it would. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr B, pay Mr B £100 for his time and trouble, investigate Mr B's noise complaint, review parking arrangements and review its complaint handling.

  • Northampton Borough Council (19 015 347)

    Statement Not upheld Noise 06-Nov-2020

    Summary: the complainants say the Council failed to properly investigate a complaint of statutory noise nuisance. The Council says it followed its usual practice in line with WHO guidelines. The Ombudsman finds the Council acted without fault.

  • East Staffordshire Borough Council (19 017 558)

    Statement Not upheld Noise 29-Oct-2020

    Summary: Mr B complained about the Council's actions in restricting his contact over noise issues with his neighbour. We do not find fault with the Council.

  • Babergh District Council (19 018 486)

    Statement Not upheld Noise 28-Sep-2020

    Summary: Mrs X complains about the Council's investigation and decision on her noise complaint, resulting in her continued suffering from noise. The Ombudsman finds no fault in the Council's investigation or decision making process.

  • Wychavon District Council (19 017 923)

    Statement Upheld Noise 28-Sep-2020

    Summary: Mr D says the Council delayed resolving a statutory noise nuisance. The Ombudsman has found evidence of fault by the Council. It could and should have acted sooner resulting in delays of over two months. The Ombudsman has completed the investigation and upheld the complaint. The Council has agreed to pay Mr D financial redress.

  • London Borough of Brent (19 001 541)

    Statement Upheld Noise 24-Sep-2020

    Summary: Ms X complained about the way the Council responded to her concerns about her neighbour's loud music. The Council was at fault for not telling Ms X how it dealt with her reports of noise nuisance. It also failed to respond to her complaint. That caused Ms X avoidable uncertainty and frustration. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X and make a symbolic payment for the injustice caused. It will also remind staff to keep complainants updated about how they are responding to their noise nuisance concerns.

  • Plymouth City Council (19 010 928)

    Statement Upheld Noise 22-Sep-2020

    Summary: Mr X complained on behalf of his relative, Mr Y, about noise nuisance from a business premises near Mr Y's home. The Council was at fault. There was delay and errors in how the Council managed Mr Y's case, which caused Mr Y frustration and distress. The Council has apologised to Mr Y, but this is insufficient to remedy the injustice caused. The Council will pay Mr Y £200 to acknowledge its errors and distress caused and review its procedures.

  • Newcastle upon Tyne City Council (19 013 148)

    Statement Not upheld Noise 10-Sep-2020

    Summary: The Ombudsman found no fault by the Council on Mr G's complaint of it failing to properly investigate and take enforcement action against 3 venues for noise nuisance. The evidence shows the Council investigated and acted on his reports. Nor am I satisfied the Council gave him inaccurate information as claimed.

  • Somerset West and Taunton Council (19 017 932)

    Statement Upheld Noise 09-Sep-2020

    Summary: The Council mismanaged Miss B's expectations when she raised a noise nuisance complaint. An officer spoke to Miss B in a way which she found upsetting. The Council has apologised to Miss B for the impact its actions had on her and undertook to provide training to its officers on these issues. The Council has taken appropriate action to acknowledge the impact of its fault on Miss B and to improve future service. The Ombudsman makes no further recommendations.

Privacy settings

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.