Summary: Mr X complained that the Council has not dealt with his noise complaints appropriately. He says the noise has therefore continued and impacted his home life. We found the Council is not at fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the way the Council has dealt with his complaints of statutory nuisance from a neighbouring pub. He says this has impacted his sleep, and his ability to enjoy his home. He says he dreads every weekend and feels anxious as it approaches.
2. Mr X is seeking a reduction in the volume of the noise coming from the pub at weekends.

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 about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. Mr X brought his complaint to this office in January 2025. Everything that happened since January 2024 falls within our jurisdiction. I have not seen any reason he could not bring his complaint to the Ombudsman sooner. On this basis, my investigation looks at the issue from January 2024.
7. My investigation has considered matters up to January 2025, when Mr X brought the complaint to this office. I understand the noise issues have continued beyond that point. If Mr X wishes to complain about the Council’s actions since that date, he may raise a new complaint.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Mr X and the Council now have had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I have considered any comments received before making this final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

10. Under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA), councils have a duty to take reasonable steps to investigate potential ‘statutory nuisances’. Activities a council might decide are a statutory nuisance include noise from premises.
11. For the issue to count as a statutory nuisance, it must:
• Unreasonably and substantially interfere with the use or enjoyment of a home or other property; and/ or
• Injure health or be likely to injure health.
12. There is no fixed point at which something becomes a statutory nuisance. Councils rely on suitably qualified officers to gather evidence. Officers may, for example, ask the complainant to complete diary sheets, fit noise-monitoring equipment, or make site visits.
13. 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.
14. If a council is satisfied a statutory nuisance is happening, has happened or will happen in the future, it must serve an abatement notice. If the nuisance is noise from premises, the council may delay issuing an abatement notice for a short period, to try to address the problem informally.
15. An abatement notice requires the person or people responsible to stop or limit the activity causing the nuisance. Failure to comply with an abatement notice is an offence, which can lead to prosecution and a fine.

What happened

16. Mr X lives in a property neighbouring a pub. He complained to the Council about unreasonable noise, and in February 2024 the Council issued an abatement notice.
17. In May 2024, Mr X complained about loud music again. The Council visited, observed there was a noise nuisance and issued a fixed penalty notice.
18. In November 2024, Mr X complained to the Council again about the noise levels from the pub. The Council attended, observed there was another breach of the abatement notice and issued a reminder letter to the pub.
19. Following a further breach in December 2024, the Council issued another fixed penalty notice.
20. In its complaint response of January 2025, the Council acknowledged that Mr X’s quality of life and the enjoyment of his home were being impacted by the ongoing noise issue.
21. The Council stated the pub had breached the abatement notice three times in the previous year and again on 2 January 2025.
22. In January 2025, following more observations of noise nuisance, the Council met with the pub owners to discuss sound insulation work. The Council said it would continue to investigate the noise issues going forward.

Analysis and findings

23. The Council has acted on Mr X’s reports of noise nuisance. Although it has not taken the most stringent action against the pub, it has shown that it has taken actions to try to resolve the matter.
24. Within the period investigated, the Council issued an abatement notice when it observed the first noise nuisance. When the pub breached the notice, the Council has attended and issued fixed penalties or warned that it would do so to try to deter continued nuisances.
25. The Council has explained that it has taken an approach to try to work with the pub as the owners have shown themselves to be open to trying to deal with the problem. This is in accordance with the Council’s policy.
26. Although the noise has been an issue for Mr X, I am satisfied that this is not due to a lack of action on the Council’s part.
27. On this basis, I do not consider the Council to be at fault.

Back to top

Decision

28. I find the Council is not at fault.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman