Noise


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Birmingham City Council (16 015 896)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Noise 10-Aug-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council's responses to complaints about noise. This is because I have seen no fault in the way the Council has reached its decisions.

  • Brighton & Hove City Council (16 018 275)

    Statement Not upheld Noise 07-Aug-2017

    Summary: Mr C complains the Council has failed to properly investigate a noise nuisance. The Ombudsman has not found any evidence of fault by the Council. She has completed the investigation and not upheld the complaint.

  • Maldon District Council (16 006 846)

    Statement Not upheld Noise 02-Aug-2017

    Summary: There is no evidence of fault in how the Council investigated Mr X's report of noise nuisance.

  • Eastbourne Borough Council (16 000 501)

    Statement Not upheld Noise 01-Aug-2017

    Summary: The Council was not at fault in the way in which it investigated Mrs W's reports of unreasonable noise by her neighbours that she considered amounted to statutory nuisance.

  • Bedford Borough Council (17 004 752)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Noise 28-Jul-2017

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr B's complaint about the way the Council has responded to his complaints of noise and dust from a building site. Further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault by the Council.

  • East Riding of Yorkshire Council (17 005 366)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Noise 26-Jul-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X's complaint that the Council has failed to properly investigate his noise nuisance complaint. It is unlikely we would find fault by the Council or that we could achieve anything for Mr X.

  • Cheltenham Borough Council (16 016 028)

    Statement Upheld Noise 14-Jul-2017

    Summary: I uphold this complaint about the Council's noise investigation as there was some fault causing injustice. I am satisfied the action the Council had already agreed was enough to remedy the complaint.

  • London Borough of Tower Hamlets (17 004 217)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Noise 14-Jul-2017

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr B's complaint about the Council's actions when his partner's car alarm went off. Ms B had a right of appeal against the Noise Abatement Notice and the Council can seek to recover its costs involved in silencing the alarm from Ms B.

  • Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (17 004 431)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Noise 12-Jul-2017

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint that the Council has failed to respond properly to reports of noise nuisance from a nursery. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. In addition, it is too late to investigate whether the Council should have granted planning permission in 2003.

  • London Borough of Tower Hamlets (16 018 872)

    Statement Upheld Noise 10-Jul-2017

    Summary: The Council was wrong to dismiss Mr B's complaints as noise nuisance without providing further diary sheets and undertaking further investigation as he had requested. The Council accepts the Ombudsman's recommendation that the Council pay Mr B £100 as a remedy for his time and trouble in pursuing his complaint and ensure that officers provide clear and appropriate advice.

;