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

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council took a long time to investigate her noise complaint, failed to attend appointments and came without calling. She says it did not give adequate information about the recording equipment installed in her home and it has told her it cannot take her personal circumstances into account in assessing her reports of noise nuisance.

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 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 continue 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, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant, including the Council’s response to her complaint.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms X complained to the Council about the way it handled her noise complaint and that it did not take proper account of her disability and particular circumstances. The Council responded and set out the chronology of events in relation to the appointments for visiting Ms X and noted that had she asked that she be called to discuss further appointments this would have been done.
6. It concluded it had responded to her service request appropriately through its case management system and that had she made her particular circumstances clear to the Council it could have acted on this. It offered to install again the noise recording equipment.
7. We do not investigate every complaint we receive. In this case there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation. Ms X says she has been discriminated against, but the Council has explained it did not have details of her particular circumstances and requests in advance. It was correct when it told her that by law it cannot take her personal circumstances into account when deciding whether there has been a noise nuisance and that it must consider the reaction of the average person. This is disappointing for Ms X but it is not evidence of fault.

Back to top

Final decision

8. 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