Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to take enforcement action against noise nuisance from a gym. There is insufficient evidence of fault, and we are unlikely to be able to add anything worthwhile to the Council’s ongoing investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to take sufficient action over the last two years to stop noise nuisance coming from a gym below his flat. He says the noise is affecting his mental health and the enjoyment of his property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We can 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. So, we do not start 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
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

4. We also 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered:
• information provided by Mr X and the Council, which included an update on what has been happening since the Stage 1 complaint response and the current status of the case.
• the recent planning appeal decision on extended opening hours at the gym.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The 12-month time restriction detailed in paragraph 4 above appears to apply to any issues/events which arose in 2023. I see no good reasons to exercise discretion to consider these earlier events now and, as Mr X contacted the Ombudsman in January 2025, I have therefore focussed my assessment on what has happened since late-2023/early-2024.
7. I appreciate Mr X is very frustrated by the noise he experiences from the gym, and thinks the Council should be taking enforcement action on the grounds that a statutory nuisance is occurring.
8. But the Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how the Council made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
9. I consider there is insufficient evidence of fault, in the way the Council has investigated the reports of noise nuisance, and an investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to add anything worthwhile to the Council’s ongoing investigation. In reaching this view I am mindful that:
• When a statutory nuisance was observed in May 2024, the Council gave the gym 7 days to implement mitigation measure. The Council has endeavoured to continue to liaise with the gym thereafter.
• The Council has also liaised with residents, visited their properties in response to reports of noise nuisance, and considered the diary sheets, audio recording and video recordings they submitted.
• The Council installed noise monitoring equipment in three properties affected by the noise.
• The Council has reviewed the case, concluding there was insufficient evidence of a statutory nuisance, but that it may be possible to take action using other regulatory powers.
• The Council has recently instructed an independent acoustic consultant to review the evidence/case, to help it determine whether to proceed with any formal enforcement action.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault, and an investigation is unlikely to add anything worthwhile to the Council’s ongoing noise investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman