North West Leicestershire District Council (24 003 963)
Category : Environment and regulation > Pollution
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 12 Aug 2024
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to Ms X’s reports of dust nuisance from a nearby quarry. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.
The complaint
- Ms X complains about the Council’s response to her reports of dust coming from a nearby quarry which causes nuisance and concerns about her health. She says her property is too close to the quarry which keeps expanding and that the Council has not monitored the situation in a transparent way.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ which we call ‘fault’. 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)
- 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))
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by the complainant, including the Council’s response to her complaint.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- Ms X complained to the Council about its response to her reports of dust nuisance coming from a nearby quarry. It responded to explain the different methods it and the County Council have to control dust caused by work at the quarry, including continual monitoring conducted by an independent company for the quarry. It said the results of this monitoring are sent to it and it was satisfied with the findings.
- It found its officers had properly followed the Council’s procedures in responding to a dust complaint. It noted Ms X had said the problem had recently subsided but asked that she complete a two-week dust diary so it could gather more detailed information to help its team further investigate the matter.
- We do not investigate every complaint we receive. It is not our role to act as a point of appeal against decisions taken by councils with which complainants disagree. We cannot question council decisions if they have followed the right steps and considered the relevant evidence and information.
- The Council has investigated Ms X’s concerns, explained its role in monitoring dust and has told her it is satisfied with the independent regular monitoring which takes place. There is no evidence to suggest fault by the Council in its handling of this matter. If Ms X wants further information on the monitoring results, it is open to her to request them from the Council and she can complete the two-week dust diary to provide further information for the Council to assess.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman