Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to act in response to his reports of noise nuisance. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to act following his complaints of noise nuisance from a nearby business. He says the noise has affected his health and caused distress. He wants the Council to act to stop the noise nuisance.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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))

3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), 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

6. Mr X first contacted the Council to complain about noise nuisance in December 2022. The Council contacted the business who said it would act to reduce the noise.
7. In May 2023, Mr X told the Council the situation had not improved. Between 2023 and 2024, the Council investigated the noise. It visited Mr X’s property several times to assess the noise levels and considered noise recordings he submitted. It took informal action by writing to the business to make it aware of Mr X’s concerns and asking it to act to reduce the noise. However, it said it did not consider the noise disturbance met the threshold to be considered a statutory nuisance, so it would not take formal enforcement action.
8. We are 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 the processes an organisation has followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, even if someone disagrees with it.
9. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council has appropriately considered Mr X’s concerns but decided the noise does not amount to a statutory nuisance. As the Council has appropriately considered the matter before reaching this decision, we cannot question the outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman