Summary: Ms B complained about the way the Council handled complaints of noise nuisance made about her. She further complained about the way the Council responded to her complaints. She said the Council’s actions caused her considerable stress and meant she considered moving house. There was fault by the Council and it will apologise to Ms B.

The complaint

1. I call the complainant Ms B. She complained about the way the Council handled complaints of noise nuisance made about her. She further complained about the way the Council responded to her complaints. She said the Council’s actions caused her considerable stress and meant she considered moving house.

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. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

4. 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

5. I considered the complaint provided by Ms B. I asked the Council to comment on the complaint and provide information. I sent a draft of this statement to Ms B and the Council and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Summary of events

6. Problems started to develop between Ms B and her neighbours in 2019. Ms B has two young adult children who have additional needs. The neighbours complained about amplified music being played in the garden. In January 2020 the Council wrote to Ms B about the complaints received. Ms B responded explaining the issues she had experienced with the neighbours. In summary, she referred to them being abusive to her children and filming her and her children in the garden and in their property. She referred to involvement by the police.
7. In early February the Council installed noise monitoring equipment in the neighbouring property. Following that the Council issued Ms B with a community protection warning. Ms B replied reiterating her concerns about the neighbour. The Council replied and forwarded a copy of her email to the police. There was further correspondence at the end of February
8. The next contact was in April when an advocate working with Ms B wrote to the Council. She said she was involved following involvement by social services. She referred to the installation of the noise monitoring equipment and that the Council had accepted the videos made by the neighbours as evidence.
9. The Council replied. It said issues of harassment were matters for the police and suggested mediation. At the same time the Council wrote to the neighbour saying they should not film Ms B and her family as she found it aggravating and it may reduce tensions if they stopped.
10. There was a phone call from the advocate in June to the Council but there was then no further contact. Ms B did not engage in mediation and the Council closed the case in August as it did not have grounds to take further action.

Analysis

11. The Council did not respond to Ms B’s email in January 2020. It did write to her in February following further correspondence from her after it had sent the warning letter. The Council should have replied sooner and more fully to Ms B. It needed to explain what its powers were and the issues it could, and could not, look at. The response in February did go some way to explaining this but it was not until April that the Council sent an adequate response and explanation.
12. The Council did have contact with the police who were involved and also with adult social care. This was appropriate and there no fault by the Council in how responded to the points Ms B raised. The failure was in the communication with her.
13. The Council issued a warning letter to Ms B but no further action was taken. There was not fault in that as the Council had sufficient grounds to issue a letter.
14. One particular concern for Ms B was about video recordings made by her neighbours of her and her children in their home and garden. Her neighbours did make recordings to support their complaints of noise and the Council was aware of, and viewed, certainly some of those recordings. The Council did not raise any concerns about this action and whether it may be a breach of Ms B’s rights. It only did so later in response to the concerns raised by Ms B’s advocate. The Council should have considered, and if necessary taken advice, on whether it could and should consider that material.
15. The crux of Ms B’s complaint is that the Council was not even-handed in the approach it took. Ms B levelled her complaints at the particular officer who was dealing with the complaints of noise made by her neighbour. We consider the actions of the Council as a whole and on the basis of the Council’s responsibilities. This complaint was not just a complaint about noise but had to be considered in the context of known difficulties between the parties. In such circumstances it is vital the Council is, and is seen to be, fair and even-handed in the approach it takes. The failure to respond adequately to Ms B combined with the contact with the neighbours makes it appear as if the Council was not being even-handed.
16. In saying that I recognise the Council was considering the specifics of the noise issue and it did not take formal action against Ms B as it decided there was not the evidence to do so in September 2020. Nor did Ms B or her advocate pursue any concerns they may have after the contact with the advocate in May 2020. The next recorded contact was in March 2021. So there was no reason why the Council would have responded further before then.

Back to top

Agreed action

17. The Council will, within a month of the final decision, apologise to Ms B for the faults I have found.

Back to top

Final decision

18. There was fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman