Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a noise nuisance complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council considered the matter.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council response to his noise complaint from a community hall. He said the associated disturbance caused distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
3. 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))

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 said the Council failed to properly investigate and resolve his noise complaint.
7. Based on the information I have seen, the Council visited Mr X, met with representatives of the community hall, and sought to manage the most significant impacts of the noise through mediation and the issuing of a formal warning. When the noise nuisance persisted, the Council escalated its response by serving an abatement notice and explaining that enforcement action would follow if the notice was breached. However, the community hall subsequently closed, meaning enforcement action was no longer required.
8. In this instance, I consider the Council has investigated and responded to Mr X’s service request and as such there is insufficient evidence of fault.
9. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Nor can we tell the Council what is or is not a statutory noise nuisance. Instead, we look at the processes a Council followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether a person disagrees with the decision the Council made.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault in how the Council considered the matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman