Summary: We have upheld this complaint about noise disturbance from commercial generators. While we cannot add to the Council’s ongoing planning enforcement action, there is evidence it did not properly investigate the reports as a potential statutory nuisance. The Council has agreed to take action to address this, which is a proportionate remedy.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that the Council failed to take effective action to address ongoing noise from unauthorised commercial generators, despite repeated reports. They say the Council indicated action would be taken but this did not happen and the noise continued to affect their health and quality of life. Mr X also says the Council delayed and failed to follow its complaints procedure, missing response times and providing poor communication. They want the Council to resolve the noise issue, apologise for the delays, review its complaint handling, and provide compensation for distress and inconvenience.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X reported ongoing noise from commercial generators and said the Council failed to take effective action. The Council confirmed it served enforcement notices in relation to generators at two neighbouring properties and took steps including site visits, liaison between planning enforcement and property teams, and internal action because it owns the units.
6. Decisions about planning enforcement involve professional judgement. The Ombudsman cannot require a council to take a particular enforcement action or reach a specific outcome. Based on the information available, I consider the Council has recognised the planning breach and is taking steps to address it. I have not seen evidence of fault in how it has considered planning enforcement matters.
7. The Council also accepted fault for delay and poor communication in responding to the complaint. It apologised and paid £100 to recognise the time and trouble caused. I am satisfied this is a proportionate remedy for that aspect of the complaint.
8. Mr X also reported ongoing noise affecting his sleep, health and enjoyment of his home. This engages the Council’s duty under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to take reasonably practicable steps to investigate whether a statutory nuisance exists.
9. If we investigated this complaint, we would be likely to find fault. This is because the Council has not demonstrated it took reasonably practicable steps to investigate the reported noise through its Environmental Health service.
10. The Council said responsibility for noise sits with its environmental protection service. The Council’s view that the noise was unlikely to meet the statutory nuisance threshold appears to be informal and not based on a structured assessment or objective evidence. This indicates the Council may not have properly considered the complaint under the statutory nuisance procedures.
11. This has caused injustice to Mr X. He has been left with uncertainty about whether the noise amounts to a statutory nuisance and has experienced avoidable distress.

Back to top

Agreed action

12. To its credit, the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint. It has agreed to:

• arrange for Mr X’s reports of generator noise to be assessed by its Environmental Health service as a potential statutory nuisance;
• take reasonably practicable steps to investigate and determine whether a statutory nuisance exists; and
• confirm the outcome of that consideration to Mr X.

The Council should complete this within one month of this final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We have upheld this complaint, and the Council has agreed to take action to provide a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman