Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of noise nuisance complaints he made against a business which operates close to his. We will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, says the Council has failed to investigate his complaint about the level of noise coming from a business which is impacting on his business. He says the business was tipped off by someone from the Council when noise monitoring equipment was installed and the Council has said it will not reinvestigate even though the business has a new machine.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ which we call fault. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. 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 an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council, including its responses to the complaint.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. I gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X complains the Council has not investigated his noise complaint. However, the Council did investigate but it did not find a statutory nuisance against which it could take enforcement action. It installed noise recording equipment and listened to the submitted recordings.
8. It is not our role to question the merits of decisions a council makes if it has followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information. In the professional view of officers, the noise from the business is not considered unacceptable given the site’s established planning use in the locality and the time of day the noise has been reported.
9. While this is a disappointing decision for Mr X, I have seen no evidence to suggest fault affected it. If Mr X has evidence to support his allegation that the business was tipped off by a Council employee, then he should pass this directly to the Council. If there has been a substantial change in the nature or type of noise then, as the Council has told Mr X, he can report this to the Council for further consideration of the matter.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman