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

The complaint

2. Ms X complained about noise from a nearby construction site. She said the Council failed to:
• properly consider her complaint and the impact of the noise on her health and well-being; and
• make residents aware when it approved any extensive work schedules beyond those previously agreed.
3. She said the continuous noise has severely affected her health and forced her to move out of her home. She wants the Council to acknowledge her concerns and implement a plan to support her.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Ms X previously complained to Transport for London (TfL) regarding noise from a nearby construction site where TfL is redeveloping an underground train station. In our earlier decision, we advised Ms X to raise her complaint with the Council, as it was responsible for granting planning permission for the building works and for monitoring noise mitigation measures for work conducted outside the agreed working hours. She has since done so, and the Council reviewed her complaint.
8. In its complaint response the Council explained it worked closely with the contractors and TfL to ensure work was carried out in accordance with Best Practicable Means (BPM). The Council clarified that BPM is a technical term, meaning that while noise cannot be entirely eliminated, the government permits certain noise levels, particularly for short-term projects.
9. The Council acknowledged some work, particularly at night, can be especially noisy, such as drilling. However, it explained that these activities must be carried out during times when underground power can be switched off, as trains cannot operate while work is being done overhead.
10. The Council further stated it was not directly responsible for informing residents about updates to out-of-hours scheduled works. It explained this responsibility lies with the construction company and TfL. However, the Council assured it is working with these organisations to draft appropriate communications and ensure residents receive relevant updates.
11. The Council took appropriate steps to address Ms X’s concerns about the noise. It stated it will continue to monitor noise levels from the construction site and relay any concerns it has during its weekly update meetings with the project’s stakeholders. Therefore, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
12. The Council concluded that a project of this scale will inevitably cause noise at sensitive times of the day. However, it remains committed to minimising disruption for residents within its legal remit. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint, as further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman