Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Ms X’s reports of noise and odour nuisance from the operation of a business close to her home. 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 has failed to properly investigate her reports of noise and smells from a business operating close to her home. She says it has not carried out visits at the appropriate times or locations and that it delayed in responding to her and did not advise her of the outcome of the case review.

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 how the organisation made its decision, 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 continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. It is not our role to act as a point of appeal against decisions made by councils with which complaints disagree. We cannot question decisions made by councils if they have followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information.
7. While Ms X may be disappointed with the time taken to investigate her reports of nuisance, and for a decision to be made on the business’ retrospective planning application, there is no evidence to suggest the Council did not properly follow normal procedures. It carried out numerous visits but did not find evidence of noise or odour which amounted to a statutory nuisance. Such decisions are for officers to make using their professional judgement and we cannot review the merits of them.
8. The Council has now determined the retrospective planning application relating to the business and has attached conditions relating to noise and odour which it has confirmed it will be monitoring.
9. There was delay by the Council in responding to some of Ms X’s contact and requests for information and it did not update her following the case review. However, while this is noted, there are insufficient grounds to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

10. 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