Summary: Mr F complains about light intrusion caused by an LED streetlight outside his home. The Ombudsman has found no fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr F complains about light intrusion caused by an LED streetlight outside his home. He says the Council has not properly assessed the light levels and has ignored the measurements he has taken which show the streetlight to be brighter than the Council claims. Mr F wants the Council to either move the streetlight or to fit a shield. He says he has had to install new blinds as the light shines into the bedrooms.

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 cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the Council’s response to my enquiries and the Institution for Lighting Professional’s guidance note for the reduction of obtrusive light.
5. Mr F and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Councils are responsible for the erection and maintenance of street lighting. Councils are expected to meet the relevant British and European standards when installing new street lighting. Lux is the standardised measurement of light intensity.
7. Councils should avoid unacceptable light intrusion from street lights. The Institution of Lighting Professionals guidance recommends light intrusion into windows in a suburban area should not be more than 10 lux before midnight and 2 lux after. The guidance also recommends various other ways of reducing light intrusion such as using shields and baffles. This guidance may be supplemented or replaced by the council’s own planning guidance for exterior lighting installations.
8. The Council says its street lights have been designed and installed in accordance with standards and guidance. It seeks to minimise obtrusive light levels but it also has to consider the safe passage of pedestrians and road users.
9. The Council deals with concerns about light intrusion under its complaints’ procedure. As part of the complaint investigation, the Council will test the lighting level at the external wall of a customer’s property. If the lighting levels are too high, the Council will decide whether to install a light shield. If remedial work does not resolve matters to the customer’s satisfaction, the complaint is further considered at the review stage of the complaints’ procedure.

What happened

10. Mr F complained to the Council on 23 December 2019 that a newly installed street light was shining into his house. The Council said it would test the lighting levels and did so on the night of 8 January 2020. The test found the levels were 15 lux before midnight and 5 lux after. As this was above e recommended levels the Council told Mr F it would install a front shield in the light. The shield was installed on13 January 2020.
11. Mr F contacted the Council on 17 January 2020. He said there had been some improvement but there was still light intrusion.
12. The Council carried out a further test on 1 February 2020. This found the levels were 6 lux before midnight and 2 lux after. As these were within the recommended range the Council told Mr F it would not take any further action.
13. Mr F remained dissatisfied and carried out his own independent assessment with calibrated equipment. He wrote to the Council on 8 February 2020 to say his measurements had found the levels to be up to 12 lux inside his property’s perimeter.
14. The Council replied that a professional lighting engineer carries out the lighting level tests to ensure all tests are carried out correctly, impartially and consistently across Sheffield. It therefore did not take into account independent light surveys and it would not take any further action. Mr F complained to the Ombudsman.

My findings

15. It is not the Ombudsman’s role to assess lighting levels, that is the Council’s role. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. I have therefore considered whether the Council properly dealt with Mr F’s reports of light intrusion.
16. When Mr F complained the Council carried out a test in line with its policies. When it found the light levels were too high it installed a shield. It carried out a second test when Mr F raised further concerns. I have seen that the results of the second test show the lux levels were within the recommended levels and I have seen no evidence of fault in the way the tests were conducted.
17. Mr F is concerned the Council has ignored his own measurements, which show the light level to be much higher.
18. In response to my enquiries the Council said it used the same instruments throughout its area, which are regularly calibrated with a professional calibration contractor, and it took measurements at particular times of night and at particular locations, in line with the guidance. This was to ensure consistency of lighting levels tests. It said light measurements taken by individual customers were not guaranteed to be accurate as the instruments could not be verified as working correctly or may not be calibrated correctly, and the methodology adopted may be different to the standards set out in the guidance.
19. I find there was no fault by the Council. It dealt with Mr F’s complaint in line with its procedure, carried out tests in line with the standards and guidance, took measures to reduce the light intrusion, and has given rational reasons why it cannot consider Mr F’s own measurements. These are steps the Ombudsman would expect the Council to take. As I have found no fault, I cannot challenge the Council’s decision not to take further action in relation to the street light.

Back to top

Final decision

20. There was no fault by the Council. I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman