Summary: Ms X complained about various aspects of an ASB Case Review. We have concluded our investigation having made a finding of fault. The Council were delayed in sending Ms X a copy of the Case Review report, but it has sufficiently remedied this. We did not find fault for further matters complained about; the Case Review report sets out the matters considered and there is no evidence to suggest the Council did not consider all the information put before it. The report concluded that no further action should be taken, and this is a judgement the Council were entitled to make.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council:
1. Misunderstood and ignored key elements of the case.
2. Delayed providing a report following the ASB Case Review meeting.
3. Provided an insufficient report which omitted key information.
4. Decided to take no further action and did not give justifications for its decision; and
5. Refused, without justification, her request to appeal the outcome of the Case Review
2. Ms X says events throughout this complaint have left her feeling depressed, isolated, and vulnerable. Ms X would like the Council to take sufficient action to prevent any ongoing anti-social behaviour from her neighbours.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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)
5. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. We cannot investigate the actions of bodies such as the Police. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 25 and 34(1), as amended)
6. When considering complaints, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
7. The courts have said that where someone has sought a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, we cannot investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916)
8. 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(i), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

9. I have not investigated any complaint related to parking. Ms X has pursued legal action which has gone through a court of law. This means the matter is out of our jurisdiction as per paragraph 7.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I considered the information Ms X and the Council provided. Ms X and the Council were offered an opportunity to comment on my draft decision and I considered any comments submitted before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

Anti-social behaviour

11. Council’s have a general duty to tackle anti-social behaviour (ASB). But ASB can take many different forms; and when someone reports a problem, councils should decide which of their powers is most suitable. For example, they may approach a complaint:
• as an environmental health issue, where the complaint is about noise or pollution;
• as a planning matter;
• as a licensing matter;
• as part of their duties as a social landlord, where the alleged perpetrator is a council tenant (although we cannot investigate the council’s actions as a social landlord); and/or
• using their powers under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.
12. Councils and the police can issue community protection notices (CPNs) to prevent ASB which is unreasonable and having a negative effect on the community's quality of life. A CPN requires the behaviour to stop and, where appropriate, require the recipient to take reasonable steps to stop it happening again. Not complying is an offence and may result in a fine or a fixed penalty notice.

Statutory nuisances

13. Under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA), councils have a duty to take reasonable steps to investigate potential ‘statutory nuisances’.
14. There is no fixed point at which something becomes a statutory nuisance. Councils rely on suitably qualified officers to gather evidence. Officers may, for example, ask the complainant to complete diary sheets, fit noise-monitoring equipment, or make site visits. Councils will sometimes offer an ‘out-of-hours’ service for people to contact, if a nuisance occurs outside normal working time.
    Once evidence gathering is complete, a council will assess the evidence. It will consider matters such as the timing, duration, and intensity of the alleged nuisance. Officers will use their professional judgement to decide whether a statutory nuisance exists.
15. The law says that a potential nuisance must be judged on how it affects the average person. Councils cannot take action to stop something which is only a nuisance to the complainant because they have special circumstances, such as a medical condition which makes them unusually sensitive to noise or fumes.
16. Councils can also decide to take informal action if the issue complained about is causing a nuisance, but is not a statutory nuisance. They may write to the person causing the nuisance or suggest mediation.

The anti-social behaviour case review (formally known as the Community Trigger)

17. The Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 introduced a way to review the handling of complaints of ASB. This is the anti-social behaviour case review, which was previously known as the ‘Community Trigger’. The government published statutory guidance for professionals, to assist authorities and agencies that exercise functions under the 2014 Act to respond to instances of ASB.
18. When a person asks for a review, relevant bodies (which may include the council, police and others) should decide whether it meets the local threshold. Relevant local bodies should agree their review threshold, but the ASB statutory guidance says this should be, at a maximum, that a complainant has made three reports of ASB within six months.
19. If the threshold is met, the relevant bodies should carry out the review. They should share information, consider what action has already been taken, decide whether more should be done, and then tell the complainant the outcome. If they decide to take more action, they should create an action plan.
20. Asking for an ASB case review is not the same as making a formal complaint against a council for how it has handled reports of ASB.
21. We can only consider councils’ actions in an ASB case review. We cannot investigate or make findings about any contribution made by other relevant bodies, such as the police.

Back to top

What happened

22. I have included a summary of some of the key events in this complaint. This is not intended to be a comprehensive account of everything that took place and does not mean I have not considered all the evidence before me.

Background

23. From May 2023, Ms X asserts that her neighbours had been parking obstructively preventing access to and from her property. Ms X also asserts that her neighbours had been acted antisocially towards her and guests in her property, including harassment and intimidation. Ms X had made numerous reports to the Council about this.

Events thereafter

24. In July 2023, a request was made for a Case Review.
25. Later in July 2023, the Council confirmed the threshold had been met.
26. In August 2023, the Case Review convened.
27. Between August 2023 and September 2023, Ms X pursued a civil case against her neighbours. An injunction was accepted not to park obstructively.
28. In later September 2023, the report was sent to Ms X.
29. In October 2023, Ms X submitted a request to the Council to appeal the Case Review, but was declined by the Council.

Complaints

30. In November 2023, Ms X submitted a Stage 1 complaint to the Council.
31. In December 2023, the Council issued its Stage 1 complaint response. Of note, it said:
• The Panel considered all the information Ms X had submitted, including the written report and photographs presented during the meeting, and the information and videos submitted after the meeting. The Council said the parking concerns were a civil matter.
• The Council acknowledged and apologised for the delay in sending Ms X the report.
• The report provided a summary of the issues and actions submitted by all parties and when considering and reviewing the case, all the information submitted was considered in full by the Panel. The Council disagreed with Ms X’s assertion that the report and the conclusion were minimal or omitted important information.
• The Panel were in agreement that there were no issues requiring further action and that in the circumstances the recommendations of the report were that no further action was required to be taken. It said it would consider any further reports of harassment or anti-social behaviour on their merits and action as necessary.
• Said it had provided sufficient justification for declining Ms X’s appeal request, citing that Ms X had appealed on the grounds the report did not record key events and facts she had reported, and it considered it did as all the information submitted was considered by the Panel.
32. Later, Ms X escalated her complaint to Stage 2 of the Council’s complaint process.
33. In February 2024, the Council issued its Stage 2 complaint response. Of note, it said:
• The report sets out that the complaint to be considered included inconsiderate parking, intimidation and harassment. The Council also said that every aspect of evidence submitted was considered by the Panel.
• Acknowledged Ms X provided, verbal, written and visual evidence which was considered by the multi-agency panel, and that it was concluded that the parking issue was a civil matter, anti-social behaviour reported between May 2023 and the ASB Case Review was deemed to require no further action.

Back to top

Analysis

Misunderstood and ignored key elements of the case

34. The evidence does not demonstrate that the Council ignored or misunderstood Ms X’s concerns and issues, the Case Review Report clearly acknowledged Ms X’s concerns regarding harassment and abuse.
35. The conclusion of the report deemed the anti-social behaviour to be a reaction to Ms X’s actions which reflects a considered professional judgment about the matters. This indicates the Case Review Panel thoroughly evaluated the circumstances and Ms X’s allegations before determining that no further action was required. On this point, I have not made a finding of fault.

Delayed providing a report following the ASB Case Review meeting

36. In the Council’s Stage 1 complaint response to Ms X, it acknowledged that there was delay in providing the report to Ms X. The Case Review was convened in August 2023, and the report not sent until late September 2023. This is fault.
37. Whilst I acknowledge delay in sending the report to Ms X, I have not seen evidence that this caused Ms X a significant injustice. The Council apologised to Ms X, and I consider this a sufficient remedy which does not warrant any further action by the Council.

Provided an insufficient report which omitted key information

38. Whilst Ms X asserts the report was insufficient and omitted key information, it is not within our scope to critique the depth or thoroughness of the Case Review Report. My review of the evidence confirms that all pertinent information was indeed considered, and it is for the Panel, but in this instance the Council, to consider what weight to give to the information within. The report reflects, whilst I understand that Ms X does not agree, a complete assessment of the issues raised, including issues concerning parking, intimidation and harassment. On this point, I have not made a finding of fault.

Decided to take no further action and did not give justifications for its decision

39. The decision not to take any further action falls within the Council’s professional discretion, which it is fully entitled to exercise. Moreover, the evidence demonstrates the Council did provide justifications for its decision, as evidenced in the report.
40. The report explains that the anti-social behaviour was viewed as a report to Ms X’s actions regarding the parking dispute, and this rationale was documented. Thus, the Council not only made a justified decision, but also supported it with evidence and reasoned explanation.
41. Further, it was confirmed that any further reports of anti-social behaviour would be considered on a case-by-case basis, and on their own merits.

Refused, without justification, Ms X’s request to appeal the outcome of the Case Review

42. The Council refused Ms X’s appeal to the outcome of the Case Review, and Ms X’s asserts this was done so without sufficient justification. The Council set out its reasons for refusing Ms X’s appeal in an email it sent in October 2023. In the email:
• The Council acknowledged that Ms X wanted to appeal the findings in the report on the basis that the report did not include key events and facts she had previous reported and presented at the review.
• The Council acknowledged that at the meeting, Ms X had provided a report which included pictures also. It also acknowledged that Ms X had sent two emails with further information including photos and videos to review prior to the report being completed. The Council confirmed that this had all been reviewed prior to the report being completed.
• On this basis, the Council said that the grounds for Ms X’s appeal had been considered but would not be taken any further. The Council confirmed that it would consider any further reports of harassment or anti-social behaviour going forward.
43. The Council is entitled to refuse Ms X’s request for an appeal. In the email sent in October 2023, the Council set out its reasons for refusing Ms X’s request for an appeal. On this point, I have not found fault.

Back to top

Final decision

44. I have concluded my investigation have made a finding of fault. The Council were delayed in sending Ms X a copy of the Case Review report, but it has sufficiently remedied this. I did not find fault for further matters complained about; the Case Review report sets out the matters considered and there is no evidence to suggest the Council did not consider all the information put before it. The report concluded that no further action should be taken, and this is a judgement the Council were entitled to make.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman