Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to take action in respect of a street light that casts excessive light into the bedrooms of his home. There is no fault in how the Council and its contractor has investigated Mr X’s complaint and taken the decision that the light should not be adjusted.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to take action in respect of a street light that casts excessive light into the bedrooms of his home.
2. Mr X says that one bedroom cannot be occupied and that full darkness can never be achieved in the main bedroom, resulting in disturbed sleep on several occasions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Key facts

7. This section sets out the key events in this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology.
8. Mr X raised concerns about a light on a building opposite his property. He contacted both the Council and its street lighting contractor. This resulted in a manager visiting his property and conducting measurements in February 2025. Measurements were taken in Mr X’s property and found to be within the recommended limit stated in national guidance.
9. Within a few days the contractor visited and applied some tape to the street light. Mr X says this made no appreciable difference and his property is still subject to excessive light pollution. The Council says no further adjustments can be made.
10. Mr X has written suggesting possible solutions including:
• Removing the street light
• Replacing the street light
• Installing a metal cowl
• Turning the light off for part of the night.
11. In response to my enquiries, the Council says the light was installed more than 40 years ago. In dealing with Mr X’s concerns, consideration has been given to guidance set out by the Institution of Lighting Professionals (ILP). This guidance was first published in 2005. The Council’s policy says that it uses the guidance to determine acceptable limits for obtrusive light into bedroom windows depending on the zone and ensuring it provides adequate lighting to the highway.
12. The Council has determined Mr X’s property is within zone E3 according to the ILP guidance. E3 applies to well inhabited rural and urban settlements and small town centres of suburban locations. Mr X considers it should be E2 which is considered to be sparsely inhabited rural areas, village or relatively dark outer suburban locations. The Council says that the village Mr X lives in has a population of over 850 in 380 households.
13. The ILP guidance gives a maximum value for vertical illuminance on premises in an E3 zone of 10 lux. The measurement taken at Mr X’s property was of nine lux. Mr X does not dispute this measurement but says this is not an acceptable level.
14. Mr X says the ILP guidance requires a lower level of illumination “post curfew” and has raised why the amount of light is not reduced for part of the night. The Council says that its streetlighting policy now allows for lights to be turned off and/or dimmed for part of the night. However, this only applies on certain roads. It says that full lighting is maintained all night in town centres, high crime areas, designated traffic routes, areas with road humps, roundabouts and other high-risk locations.
15. The Council says that as the road on which the street light is located is a B road and a designated traffic route, it has to remain on all night and it cannot be dimmed as this could cause a risk to the travelling public and it has a duty under the Highway Act 1980 to ensure safety.

Analysis

16. Mr X has raised concerns about a light, located on a building opposite his home. He says the amount of light coming from this street light into his property means his property is never in complete darkness and can disturb sleep. He believes the Council should take action to reduce this because of the impact it has on him.
17. The Council employs a contractor to manage street lighting on its behalf. It therefore initially directed Mr X to the contractor to deal with his concerns. The information provided indicates the contractor visited Mr X at home and inspected the situation as well as taking measurements. This showed the light in Mr X’s property to be nine lux and so within the ILP guidance, even though the light was installed many years before this guidance was published.
18. I note Mr X’s disagreement with the classification of the area in which he lives. The Council has determined the area to be E3 and has provided population and household figures to support its position. A difference of opinion between Mr X and the Council is not evidence of fault. The Council has used its professional judgement and determined the area is E3. I am not persuaded there is any fault in how it reached that decision and so I cannot criticise it even though Mr X takes a different view.
19. One issue that had not previously been addressed in the complaint correspondence is that of switching off and/or dimming the light for part of the night. This is something that happens in parts of the county already. The Council says that this currently applies to approximately 30,000 lights. However, it says the light opposite Mr X’s property is not switched off because it is situated on a designated road and it has a duty to ensure the road is properly lit on safety grounds. I appreciate this may be disappointing for Mr X but I cannot say there is fault by the Council in the fact the light remains on all night.
20. I am satisfied the Council, and its contractor on its behalf, have properly considered Mr X’s complaints and responded to them. While this has not resulted in action to satisfy Mr X, I am not persuaded there is any fault by the Council. It is not the Ombudsman’s role to replace judgements properly reached even though a person may disagree with them. The absence of any administrative failings means I cannot criticise the decision made by the Council to continue to keep the street light on and not make adjustments or modifications as requested by Mr X.

Back to top

Decision

21. There is no evidence of fault causing a significant injustice and so I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman