Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s past handling of her complaints of noise nuisance. We will not investigate the complaint because an investigation into past events is unlikely to achieve a useful outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Ms X, says the Council failed to properly investigate her complaint about noise nuisance caused by a neighbour’s animal and complains about the way it handled her complaint.

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 may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. I gave Ms X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered what she said.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Ms X contacted the Council in 2020 to complain about how it had handled her reports of noise nuisance from a neighbour’s animal and the evidence she had submitted about it.
8. The Council responded to her complaint and told her that due to the pandemic it could not visit but once restrictions allowed it would do so.
9. The Council subsequently wrote to Ms X in July 2020 to tell her it could now visit and asked her to make contact to arrange an appointment if the problem was continuing. It did not hear from her again, so it closed the case. Ms X says she did not receive the letter and that between July 2020 and complaining to the Ombudsman, she did not contact the Council, waiting for it to contact her.
10. In response to my enquiries, the Council has confirmed it will contact Ms X to clarify the current situation and to advise her what action to take if she wishes it to open a new case for investigation.
11. It is unfortunate Ms X did not receive the Council’s letter but it says it sent it and it is entitled to assume Ms X received it. As there has now been a gap of a year since the matter was last considered, the outcome Ms X seeks ie an end to the noise, can only be achieved based on an assessment of the current situation which the Council has confirmed it will look into.
12. We do not investigate every complaint we receive, and I do not consider an investigation of past events now would serve any useful outcome. Moreover, given the time restriction highlighted at paragraph 3, we would not investigate past events from 2019 when Ms X first reported the problem.
13. In responding to my draft decision Ms X says had the Council acted on the evidence she provided in 2019, the matter would have been resolved then and it would not have lost log sheets she subsequently submitted. She also refers to her last contact with the Council on 27 July 2020, sent before contacting us nearly a year later, which asked if she could have an update. While this email contact indicates Ms X did not receive the letter the Council had sent out earlier in July asking for details of if and how she was still being affected by the noise, it remains my view that an investigation now into past events is unlikely to achieve a useful outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because an investigation into past events is unlikely to achieve a useful outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman