Summary: Mr X complained the Council did not take action to resolve his complaint about noise nuisance. He said the noise nuisance has been ongoing and is impacting his family life. The Council was at fault because it failed to properly manage Mr X’s case. This caused Mr X uncertainty and frustration and time and trouble trying to resolve his complaint. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and pay him £200 for the time, trouble and frustration the matter has caused him. It will also complete its investigation into his complaint and inform him of the outcome and any action it proposes to take.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council did not take action as it agreed to in March 2021 in its response to his noise complaint. The Council said in its complaint response it would closely monitor Mr X’s case and respond to any new developments. Mr X said he reported many noise incidents since March 2021 and the Council did not properly investigate his reports or act to resolve the matter. He said the noise nuisance has been having a detrimental impact on his and his family’s homelife. Mr X wants the Council to properly investigate his concerns and take appropriate action.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), 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 information provided by Mr X.
5. I spoke with Mr X.
6. I made enquiries and considered the information provided by the Council.
7. I considered our “Guidance on Remedies”.
8. Mr X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on the draft version of this decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation

Statutory noise nuisances

9. Under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, councils must look into complaints about noise that could be a statutory nuisance. The noise complained about might be loud music, noisy neighbours, barking dogs, rowdy pubs or noise from industrial, trade or business premises.
10. For a noise to count as a 'statutory nuisance' it must do one of the following:
• Unreasonably and substantially interfere with the use or enjoyment of a home or other premises,
• Injure health or be likely to injure health.
11. Generally, the statutory nuisance will need to be witnessed by the Environmental Health Officer and he/she will come to an independent judgement. The process of determining what level of noise constitutes a nuisance can be quite subjective. The level of noise, its length, timing and location may be taken into consideration in deciding whether a nuisance has actually occurred.
12. If an officer decides a statutory nuisance is happening, or will happen in the future, councils must serve an abatement notice. This requires whoever is responsible to stop or restrict the noise. If someone does not comply with an abatement notice they can be prosecuted and fined.

The Council’s Noise Nuisance Procedure

13. The Council’s policy states it has a team of specialists who are responsible for noise nuisance cases. Investigators assigned to cases have the responsibility to ensure that cases are reviewed on a weekly basis and complainants are informed of progress of their case on a monthly basis until the case has been dealt with.
14. The Council’s reasonable investigation of a noise nuisance complaint will include the following actions:
• communicating with both the complainant and the perpetrator when necessary,
• providing the complainant with diary sheets for a period of two weeks,
• issuing a warning letter to the landlord for private tenants,
• installing noise equipment in complainant properties when a noise complained about is intermittent and analysing relevant data,
• collecting other information such as witness statements or recordings.
15. The Council can close a case if it has undertaken a reasonable investigation and there have been no further complaints for at least 28 days. The policy states it is not necessary for the Council to send a closure letter to the complainant or to make further contact with them.

What happened

16. Mr X lives in a privately owned end-terraced house with his family. The property adjoining Mr X’s house is occupied by private tenants. Mr X said he and his family have been disturbed by loud noise coming from his adjoining neighbours during various times of the day. He said the noise disturbance has been a combination of his neighbours playing loud music and talking loudly in the garden.
17. Mr X said he started to report his concerns to the Council in 2020 and later he complained as he said the Council was not taking action to resolve the matter. In March 2021, the Council responded to Mr X’s complaint and said it would manage his case very closely and respond to any new developments. It said it would work with Mr X to gather evidence of the noise disturbance, take reasonable and proportionate action and if required, take legal action. The Council assigned an Investigating Officer to work with Mr X on his case.
18. In March 2021, the Council issued a letter to Mr X’s neighbours. The letter informed them the Council had received complaints about loud noise coming from their property. It asked the neighbours to stop making the noise and said it was planning to start an investigation to assess a possible statutory noise nuisance. The Council then explained the legal action it may take if it was satisfied it was a statutory noise nuisance matter.
19. At the same time, the Council also issued the neighbour’s landlord a letter. Its letter asked the landlord for help to refrain their tenants from making loud noise.
20. Mr X was satisfied with these actions. He did not report any incident of noise disturbance during April 2021.
21. Between May 2021 and August 2021, Mr X reported the following noise nuisance incidents to the Council:
• In May he reported three incidents
• In June he reported two incidents
• In July he reported one incident
• In August he reported two incidents
22. Mr X said despite the Council’s assurance in March 2021 that it would respond to new developments, it did not respond to these reports or contact him to discuss what further action it could take. He was unhappy with the lack of action and brought his complaint to us.
23. In September 2021, Mr X reported a further four incidents. Following this, the Council sent another letter to Mr X’s neighbours. The letter informed the neighbours the Council had received a complaint about loud noise coming from their property. It asked the neighbours to be considerate of other neighbours if the noise was coming from their property and that it may investigate the matter if it receives a further complaint. However, Mr X was frustrated at the Council’s decision to send a further warning letter instead of taking enforcement action.
24. Mr X kept a diary of all the noise nuisance incidents he reported to the Council. He also recorded audio of the noise on a device. Mr X said the Council did not ask him for any evidence which supported his allegations. Mr X said he also spoke with the landlord to resolve the issue but was not successful in resolving the matter.
25. Mr X said in December 2021, the Council contacted him and has since taken actions to investigate his complaint further. He said it is working with him to gather evidence to support his allegations. He said the Council has also issued further warning letters to his neighbours.

The Council’s response to our enquiries

26. As part of our investigation, we asked the Council what action it had taken in response to Mr X’s noise nuisance reports and how it had kept Mr X informed. The Council said:
• it had assessed all noise nuisance incidents Mr X had reported to the Council since March 2021.
• it had contacted Mr X’s neighbours and their landlord to advise them of the reports it had received and its noise nuisance policy in September 2021.
• Mr X’s neighbours said they were not making any loud noise and instead, it was coming from another property on the street. The Council said it advised them to record the noise to establish this.
• it contacted Mr X and said it could not verify where the noise was coming from due to a lack of evidence and so it was unable to take any further action. The Council said it must be reasonable and proportionate to support any enforcement action.
27. The Council also said between the end of March 2021 and the beginning of May 2021, Mr X had not reported any noise nuisance incidents and so it closed his case, in line with its policy.
28. The Council said the Investigating Officer assigned to Mr X’s case in March 2021 had left the Team. It has now assigned a new Investigating Officer to Mr X’s case.

Back to top

Findings

29. In March 2021, Mr X was satisfied with the support from the Council. The Council had assigned an Investigating Officer to work on his case. It had also issued Mr X’s neighbours and their landlord letters advising them of the noise complaints it had received and that it was planning to start an investigation. I found no fault with the Council’s initial actions to his complaint as it was working with Mr X to resolve the complaint and it had progressed his case.
30. In May 2021, the Council said as Mr X did not submit any reports of noise nuisance incidents for over 28 days, it closed his case and said this was in line with its policy. The Council’s policy states it does not have to inform complainants that their case has been closed. However, Mr X had made a formal complaint, the Council had assigned an Investigating Officer to work on his case and it had told him it would manage his case closely and respond to new developments. It was reasonable for Mr X to expect the Council to keep him updated on the status of his case. The Council did not do this, which was fault. This caused Mr X uncertainty as to what was happening and why the Council was not responding to his reports, despite the reassurances in the complaint response.
31. Between May 2021 and September 2021, Mr X submitted several reports of noise nuisance to the Council. During this time, the Council’s communication with Mr X was poor. This is because:
• Mr X said he received no response from the Council in relation to each incident he reported.
• Mr X said he stopped receiving contact from the Investigating Officer and it was not clear why. The Council said the Investigating Officer had left the Team. It failed to inform Mr X of this.
• the Council said it was unable to establish where the noise was coming from and this was due to a lack of evidence. It is unclear if the Council made Mr X aware of this as he continued to report further incidents of the matter.
32. Between May 2021 and September 2021, the Council did not properly manage Mr X’s case in line with its policy. The policy says it will review cases weekly and update complainants every four weeks. The Council did not do this and this was fault. This caused Mr X frustration and uncertainty as to whether the Council was investigating his reports or taking any action to address his concerns.
33. The Council said it had no evidence to confirm where the noise was coming from but it did not communicate with Mr X to gather any evidence he had collated. This was fault and was not in line with the Council’s reasonable investigation of noise nuisance.
34. In September 2021, the Council did review the case and decided to issue a further warning letter to Mr X’s neighbours. Mr X said the Council is currently investigating his case and that an Investigating Officer is working on his case. I am satisfied with the action the Council is now taking. However, the Council’s lack of response to Mr X between May 2021 and September 2021 delayed the process of investigating his concerns. It did not take appropriate action during this period. This caused Mr X uncertainty, frustration and time and trouble.

Back to top

Agreed actions

35. Within one month of the final decision, the Council has agreed it will apologise to Mr X and pay him £200 for the time, trouble and frustration the matter has caused him.
36. Within three months of the final decision, the Council has agreed it will complete its investigation and provide us with evidence that it has done so. It will also inform Mr X of the outcome and any action it proposes to take.

Back to top

Final decision

37. I have now completed my investigation. The Council was at fault causing an injustice which the Council has agreed to remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman