Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his reports of anti-social behaviour by his neighbours. We will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation and because it has proposed a way forward to further investigate matters.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his reports of anti-social behaviour by his neighbours. He says his noise recordings were not properly listened to, that he believes there was sufficient evidence in them to amount to a statutory nuisance and that he only had a week of noise monitoring equipment being installed in his property.

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 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 continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (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.
6. I gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered what he said.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X complained to the Council about noise nuisance from his neighbours. The Council investigated, listened to the recordings Mr X provided and installed its sound monitoring equipment. Having done so, it decided there was insufficient evidence of a statutory nuisance. It offered to reinstall the noise monitoring equipment for an additional period because Mr X had said the week it had been installed was unusually quiet.
8. It is not our role to act as a point of appeal against decisions made by councils with which complainants disagree. We cannot question council decisions if they have followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information.
9. To date the Council’s investigations have not found evidence of a statutory nuisance and there is no evidence to suggest fault has affected its decision. However, following a recent meeting with Mr X to try and seek a resolution to the problem, the Council has offered again the opportunity to have the noise monitoring equipment installed for an additional two weeks. It has also shown Mr X how to use the Noise App properly, offered to arrange mediation and provided details about how to seek a Case Review.
10. In responding to my draft decision Mr X says he is concerned that although the Council is now working with him, this may not result in the outcome he seeks in stopping the noise nuisance. However, we will not hold open a complaint in these circumstances and if Mr X believes he has grounds for a complaint in relation to any future Council action/inaction, it is open to him to submit a new complaint to the Council and then the Ombudsman. While his comments about issues he had in obtaining a face-to-face meeting are noted, this has now taken place and an investigation is unlikely to add to that already undertaken by the Council or lead to a significantly different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation and because it has proposed a way forward to further investigate matters.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman