Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about noise nuisance from a building site in the Council’s area between August 2021 and December 2021. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault for part of the complaint, and because there is no meaningful outcome achievable for the remainder.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about noise nuisance from a building site near her home between August 2021 and December 2021.
2. Miss X said the matter caused her distress and frustration.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

Background

6. Between August 2021 and December 2021 Miss X said she experienced noise nuisance from a nearby building site. She said she complained to the Council at the time.
7. Miss X also said she recently learned through a Freedom of Information (FOI) request that the Council agreed to vary an agreement it had with the developer to allow it to operate outside its usual working hours.
8. In its complaint response the Council explained the reason it allowed some operations to take place outside the typical hours. It told Miss X it had received five complaints from nearby residents during that time. In response to the reports the Council:
1. issued verbal warnings to the contractor about its operations;
2. sent written reminders to the contractor to ensure certain operations only took place at the relevant hours;
3. refused any further out of hours operations from December 2021; and
4. visited the site and used noise monitoring equipment. It did not find a statutory nuisance took place.

Analysis

9. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint.
10. Although Miss X said she only became aware recently that the Council agreed to vary the agreement with the contractor, an investigation is unlikely to achieve any meaningful outcome because:
1. The consequence of the variation of the agreement was that Miss X says she experienced noise nuisance. The Council investigated the noise complaints it received at the time and acted as the Ombudsman would expect. There is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council responded to the noise complaints at the time.
2. The building work was completed some time ago and the alleged noise nuisance is no longer present. Due to the passage of time an investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to achieve any meaningful outcome.
11. Consequently, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault for part of the complaint, and an investigation is unlikely to achieve a worthwhile outcome for the remainder.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman