Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a Council’s response to his complaints about noise nuisance and licencing matters. He had a right of appeal to the magistrate’s court about the licencing committee’s decision. We will not investigate the other matters as further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to act following his complaints about noise nuisance and breach of licencing from a nearby business premises. He also says administrative failings affected the outcome of a licence committee decision. He says the noise disturbance is causing distress, affecting his health and efforts to resolve the matter have caused him financial loss. He wants the Council acknowledge its faults and to compensate him for his financial loss and distress caused.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
3. 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:

• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

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 complains about the outcome of a licence committee review hearing. We will not investigate this. If Mr X was unhappy with the outcome, he had a right of appeal to the magistrate’s court, which it was reasonable for him to use.
7. He also complains the Council has failed to investigate his reports of noise nuisance. In its complaint response, the Council said it offered to open a new investigation in September 2025, but Mr X did not respond. It said it was open to starting a new investigation, if Mr X wanted it to do so. We will not investigate this. The Council has provided Mr X with relevant contact details and agreed to investigate, if Mr X wants this. It is open to Mr X to accept this offer. It is unlikely an investigation by us would lead to a different outcome.
8. Mr X also says the premises is breaching its licence conditions. The Council invited him to provide further details about this and said it would then contact him further about the matter. This is a suitable response and, as the Council has agreed to further consider the matter, it is unlikely an investigation would achieve anything more or lead to a different outcome.
9. Mr X also complains about poor complaints handling and poor communication. In its complaint response, the Council acknowledged some problems with this and accepted its complaints handling could have been better. It said it had since made changes to its systems to prevent recurrence of the faults. We will not investigate this further. The Council has accepted fault and acted to improve its service. This is a suitable response, and it is unlikely an investigation would achieve anything more.
10. We could also not achieve the outcome he wants. We could not require the Council to cover his costs or issue compensation. Only a court can decide whether a Council is liable for financial loss and if, so whether it should pay compensation or damages. The courts are better placed to consider this part of his complaint and if Mr X considers the Council liable for financial loss, he can take the matter to court.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he had a right of appeal to the magistrate’s court if he was unhappy with the licencing decision and an investigation of the other matters is unlikely to lead to a different outcome or achieve anything more.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman