Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Ms X’s noise nuisance complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Ms X, says the Council has not taken seriously her complaints of noise nuisance which is affecting her sleep and causing irritation and depression.

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 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, 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))

3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council, including its response to her complaint.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council investigated Ms X’s reports of noise nuisance. While it found the presence of a low volume, low frequency noise, officers could not detect it by ear. It explained that as a statutory noise nuisance had not been established there was no further action its Environmental Health Team could take.
7. This is a disappointing decision for Ms X. However, it is not our role to question decisions taken by councils which have followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information. There is no evidence to suggest fault affected the Council’s decision.
8. The Council acknowledged it could have provided details of the noise analysis to Ms X sooner than it did and it apologised for its delay. While this is noted, the fault is not at a level which warrants a formal investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman