Stoke-on-Trent City Council (24 018 497)

Statement Upheld Noise 14-Oct-2025

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to take action to prevent his neighbour’s noise and light nuisance. We found the Council to be at fault because it did not respond to Mr X’s report about light nuisance. This caused frustration and distress. To remedy this injustice, the Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and contact him to discuss this issue. We did not find fault with the Council’s response about noise nuisance.

Wyre Forest District Council (25 005 814)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Noise 14-Oct-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to properly respond to Mrs X’s reports of noise nuisance. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Cornwall Council (24 020 608)

Statement Not upheld Noise 08-Oct-2025

Summary: We have completed our investigation into how the Council dealt with Mr X’s complaint about a statutory nuisance from a nearby ventilation system. This is because we find no fault with the way the Council made its decisions.

Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council (25 000 634)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Noise 06-Oct-2025

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.

Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (24 021 684)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Noise 01-Oct-2025

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council failed to take appropriate action to investigate nuisance from a local premises. Nor will we investigate his complaints the Council discriminated against him and wrongly applied its unreasonable complainant behaviour policy. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

London Borough of Lambeth (25 001 904)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Noise 01-Oct-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council responded to a noise nuisance concern. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames (25 007 962)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Noise 01-Oct-2025

Summary: We will not investigate Ms Z’s complaint about how the Council has handled her noise complaints since 2023. Part of the complaint is late. There is not enough evidence of fault and an investigation would be unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

St Albans City Council (24 019 295)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Noise 30-Sep-2025

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s investigation into an alleged statutory nuisance from a neighbouring business. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Bristol City Council (24 014 540)

Statement Upheld Noise 29-Sep-2025

Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to act properly when it assessed noise coming from a sports club close to his home. We find the Council to be at fault. The Council did not properly consider Mr X’s complaint. It failed to make a proper assessment of the noise. It should re-assess the noise and take the appropriate action, should a statutory nuisance be found.

Bassetlaw District Council (24 015 237)

Statement Upheld Noise 29-Sep-2025

Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not take effective action with complaints he made about excessive noise from a nearby business. We found the Council at fault for not acting on Mr X’s noise reports over the period considered which caused him significant frustration. We do not find fault with the Council’s later investigation into the noise concerns and the decision it made. The Council has agreed to apologise for the injustice caused.