Summary: Mr X complains about noisy music events held in the park opposite his home which he wants the Council to move elsewhere. We will not investigate the complaint because an investigation is unlikely to add to that already carried out by the Council or lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, complains about loud music from events held in the park opposite his home which he says can cause his front door to vibrate and cause distress to him and his family.

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 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)
3. 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), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
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 complained to the Council about music events held in the park opposite his home once a year which interferes with his and his family’s peaceful enjoyment of the family home.
8. The Council explained to Mr X that its Environmental Health Team is consulted when applications to hold such events are received. It said it follows the relevant code of practice when considering the impact of noise on surrounding homes and that the events organiser is required to produce a noise management plan.
9. It confirmed officers had checked compliance with the appointed acoustic consultant in previous years and that prior to the event the promotor delivers leaflets to surrounding residents which includes a phone number where any complaints or queries can be raised during the event.
10. Mr X is clearly affected by the noise generated by music events which happen annually in the park opposite his home. While this is noted, there is a balance the Council must strike between allowing such events which many of its residents enjoy and the impact on nearby residents who will suffer some level of noise disturbance but also enjoy the benefits of living near the park.
11. We do not investigate every complaint we receive and here I do not consider an investigation by the Ombudsman now would usefully add to the Council’s own investigation or lead to a different outcome. Mr X says he complains each year about the noise but has not used the complaints line on the day the events are taking place. However, this would appear to be the best way of raising his concerns because the noise levels on the day could be assessed and a decision taken on whether any action is required to reduce it.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because an investigation is unlikely to add to that already carried out by the Council or lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman