Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a noise nuisance because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr X, says the Council has not properly investigated his complaints about noise coming from his neighbour’s property. Mr X would like the Council to appoint another officer to consider the matter, and to undertake further investigation to resolve the issue.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X including his comments in response to my draft decision. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. We will not investigate this complaint because we are unlikely to find the Council’s assessment was affected by fault. The Council investigated Mr X’s complaint of a noise nuisance and it did not identify noise that amounted to a statutory nuisance. The Council:
• provided and reviewed diary sheets completed by Mr X;
• reviewed sound recordings collected by Mr X via a phone app;
• installed noise recording equipment and analysed the recordings; and
• visited Mr X’s property on two separate occasions, once with an additional officer.
5. Mr X disagrees with the Council’s analysis that noise picked up during sound recordings was ‘passing traffic’, but this is not evidence of fault. The Council followed the correct procedure in investigating the matter and it did not determine a noise nuisance that it was able to act on.
6. Mr X also complained that the Council informed his neighbour it was installing noise recording equipment, however the Council advised Mr X that it had not. In any instance, there is nothing to suggest this had impacted the Council’s findings. During visits to Mr X’s property, and on occasions when Mrs X advised the noise was present, the Council could still not identity noise that amounted to a statutory nuisance.
7. Mr X wants the Council to reinstall the noise recording equipment, but it advised him that reinstalling the equipment would be of no significant benefit. The Council said it had collected and analysed over 200 recordings and had sufficiently determined that there was no statutory nuisance. The Council has sufficiently investigated the matter and we are unlikely to find fault in its decision to conclude its investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman