Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council dealt with Mrs X’s reports of statutory nuisance and breach of planning control at sites near her home. Complaints about matters arising before December 2024 are made too late. And we have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered later complaints to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the way the Council dealt with:
• Planning applications for sites close to her home;
• Reports of statutory noise and pollution nuisances; and
• Reports of breaches of planning control.

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. 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 has done.

(Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

4. We investigate 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 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. The law says a complaint must be made to the Ombudsman within 12 months of the complainant becoming aware of the matter. I have seen no reason why Mrs X could not have come to use much sooner about events which occurred so long ago. Therefore I will not consider parts of Mrs X’s complaint which concern events which occurred more than a year before she first contacted us.
8. The Council confirms it has visited her neighbour’s property several times and confirmed there are no breaches of planning control at his property.
9. The Ombudsman is not an appeal service. The Council has considered Mrs X’s reports of breaches of planning control. It has visited the site and communicated with the owner. It is satisfied there are no breaches of planning control at her neighbour's property. We will not investigate the way the Council considered Mrs X’s reports of breaches of planning control at her neighbour’s property. This is because we have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.
10. Mrs X also complains the Council failed to act on her reports of statutory noise and smoke nuisance caused by her neighbour.
11. Councils have a duty to investigate noise complaints they receive but their powers to take enforcement action in noise matters are discretionary. They may only use their powers where they are satisfied the noise identified amounts to a statutory noise nuisance. The assessment of whether a noise is a statutory nuisance is for officers to make. It is also for officers to decide what investigations of noise reports are required to make their statutory nuisance decision.
12. The Council has investigated Mrs X’s concerns. It has listened to her noise recordings and is satisfied the noise does not meet the threshold for a statutory nuisance. It has also investigated her reports of smoke nuisance. It has visited Mrs X’s neighbour’s home. It is satisfied the neighbour’s appliance was correctly installed and they are burning the correct fuel.
13. 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.
14. Mrs X says the Council failed to act on her report of a breach of planning control at another site which has planning permission in principle to build new homes. The Council confirms officers have visited the site and spoken with the owner. The owner has confirmed they are not implementing the planning permission for the new homes. Rather they have carried out preparatory work to erect a retaining structure. The Council advised the owner this would require planning permission and they should stop work until they have obtained planning permission. The Council has also confirmed it will monitor the site.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because:
• It is too late to complain about events which occurred before December 2024; and
• We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered her reports of breaches of planning control and statutory noise and smoke nuisance to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman