Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to properly respond to Ms X’s noise complaints. This is because part of the complaint relates to events that took place more than 12 months ago; it would have been reasonable for Ms X to complain sooner.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about noise coming from a commercial unit near to her home which was installed in 2019. She also made a separate complaint about an unexplained noise negatively affecting her.

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 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’, 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. (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 Ms X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Miss X complained to the Council in May 2024. She said there was noise coming from a commercial unit close to her home that was negatively affecting her. She said she had raised concerns about it before and the Council had failed to address it. She also complained about a separate unexplained noise.
8. The Council visited Miss X in June 2024. It was identified that a barrier for the commercial unit needed to be replaced. The Council also found the source of the other noise complained about but did not judge it to be a statutory nuisance.
9. Miss X has complained the Council has failed to properly respond to her complaints. The Ombudsman will not usually exercise discretion to investigate complaints about events that took place more than 12 months ago. It would have been reasonable for Miss X to complain about this part of the complaint at the time. There is no good reason to exercise discretion to investigate now.
10. The Council has investigated the unexplained noise Miss X complained about and did not find evidence of a statutory nuisance. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because part of the complaint relates to events that took place more than 12 months ago; it would have been reasonable for Ms X to complain sooner.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman