Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council considered his reports of noise and anti-social behaviour. Part of his complaint is late and there are no good reasons it could not have been made sooner. Nor will we investigate the parts that are not late, because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation into these other parts of his complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council did not act to resolve his noise complaint. He said it delayed its investigation and did not consider all his evidence when making its decision to take no further action. He said this caused him distress. He wanted the Council to re-open its investigation and act on his concerns.
2. Mr X also complained about how the Council handled his complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
5. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Councils have a duty to take reasonable steps to investigate potential ‘statutory nuisances’. Noise can be a statutory nuisance.
9. Councils rely on suitably qualified officers to gather evidence to establish if a statutory nuisance is present. Once evidence gathering is complete, a council will assess the evidence. It will consider matters such as the timing, duration, and intensity of the alleged nuisance. Officers will use their professional judgement to decide whether a statutory nuisance exists.
10. Councils also have a general duty to tackle Anti-social behaviour (ASB).
11. In January 2023, Mr X complained to the Council about noise nuisance and ASB from a nearby property.
12. To investigate his complaint, the Council asked Mr X to keep a log of noises and use a mobile app to record sounds. In December 2023, the Council installed noise recording equipment in his home.
13. The Council reviewed Mr X’s evidence. In February 2024, it wrote to him and told him it decided the noises were not considered to be a statutory nuisance or ASB. It closed his case.
14. In January 2025, Mr X complained to us about the Council’s investigation and decision.
15. We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council delayed installing the noise monitoring equipment in his home after he informed it about his concerns. The Council installed the noise monitoring equipment in December 2023, and Mr X did not complain to us until January 2025. I have seen no good reason why Mr X could not have complained to us sooner about the Council’s actions before December 2023.
16. Additionally, we will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision the noise did not count as a statutory nuisance or ASB. From the evidence I have seen, the Council considered relevant information when making its decision, such as Mr X’s logs and noise recordings. It considered the frequency and volume of the noises against appropriate guidelines. It told Mr X the reasons for its decision.
17. Although I accept Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision, the Ombudsman cannot question or criticise the outcome of a council’s decision provided the council has acted without fault in making it.
18. Finally, we will not investigate how the Council handled Mr X’s complaint. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate a council’s complaints handling, if we decide not to deal with the substantive matter being complained about.

Back to top

Final decision

19. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because part of it is late. Of the remaining parts of his complaint we can consider, there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman