Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has considered Mr and Mrs X’s complaints of noise disturbance. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr and Mrs X complain the Council has failed to act to prevent noise disturbance from nearby business premises interfering with their enjoyment of their home. They say this has caused them distress. They want the Council to act to reduce the noise disturbance.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
3. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X has been complaining to the Council about noise disturbance from nearby business premises since 2019. The council investigated his complaint that the businesses were breaching planning conditions in 2021. It found no breach of planning. Mr X could have brought this complaint to us in 2021 and so this element of the complaint is late.
8. Mr X also complained about antisocial behaviour by those visiting the business premises and that noise generated amounted to a statutory nuisance as it was excessive and interfering with their enjoyment of their home.
9. The Council investigated his complaints on both these grounds. It convened a multi agency antisocial behaviour review meeting in 2022 but this concluded there was insufficient evidence of antisocial behaviour to warrant further action. It appropriately investigated Mr X’s reports of noise nuisance including reviewing diary sheets, visiting their property and installing noise monitoring equipment. It concluded any noise disturbance did not amount to a statutory nuisance.
10. We cannot question decisions taken by councils if they have followed the right processes and considered relevant evidence and information. Although I accept Mr and Mrs X do not agree with the decisions made, there is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decisions to justify an investigation.

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify and investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman