Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of noise complaints. This is because the complainant had a right of appeal and it would have been reasonable to expect them to use this right.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, says the Council has not handled noise complaints against him properly. He says the Council’s approach was inconsistent and did not follow the correct procedures. Mr X also complains about the Council’s handling of his complaint.

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. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), 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. The Council investigated noise complaints and reached the conclusion Mr X was causing a statutory nuisance. Mr X was served an abatement notice in March 2025.
7. Mr X was informed of his right of appeal when he was issued the abatement notice. It was reasonable for Mr X to have appealed to the court therefore the law prevents us from investigating this matter.
8. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his complaint. It is not a good use of our resources to investigate how a Council has handled a complaint if the substantive matter does not fall to be investigated. That is the case here.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it was reasonable to expect him to have used his right of appeal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman