Summary: Ms X complains the Council has failed to take action to deal with her complaints of anti-social behaviour from her neighbours causing her distress. We have found no evidence of fault in the way the Council considered these matters. So, we have completed our investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council has failed to take action over her complaints of anti-social behaviour by her neighbours for several years causing distress. Ms X says the Council’s failure to act has left her and her family open to continued abuse and harassment.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. 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

How I considered this complaint

4. I reviewed the information Ms X provided and spoke to her about her complaint. I made enquiries with the Council, considered its response, and reviewed the relevant law.
5. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant Law and guidance

Anti-social behaviour

6. Councils have a general duty to take action 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, where the complaint is about an inappropriate use of a building or facility;
• as a licensing matter, where the complaint is about a licensed premises, such as a pub or nightclub;
• 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.
7. The 2014 Act introduced six powers for agencies involved in tackling ASB. These are:
• the power to issue a community protection notice (CPN);
• the power to make a public spaces protection order (PSPO);
• the power to close premises for a set length of time;
• a civil injunction (a court order, which a council, or other agencies, can apply for);
• a criminal behaviour order (a court order made following a conviction); and
• the power for the police to disperse people from a specified area.
8. The anti-social behaviour case review
9. 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’.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. 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. 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.

The Council’s General Enforcement Policy

13. The Council’s general enforcement policy applies to all enforcement duties it undertakes including dealing with complaints of ASB. The policy aims to ensure all decisions about enforcement action are fair, proportionate and consistent. The Council will make a decision on enforcement action on its merits and after full consideration of the implications and consequences of the action. This can include:
• No action
• Verbal warning and/or advice
• Written warning and/or advice
• Community protection notices
14. The Council will liaise and coordinate enforcement activities with other regulatory bodies and enforcement agencies to maximise the effectiveness of any enforcement.

What happened in this case

15. What follows is a brief chronology of key events. It does not contain all the information I reviewed during my investigation.
16. Ms X contacted the Council in October 2021 and reported ASB concerns caused by a neighbour. Ms X and her neighbour are tenants of the same housing association (HA). An ASB officer contacted Ms X to discuss the complaint. The officer liaised with the local Police and found few reports of issues. The officer advised Ms X they would continue to liaise with the Police about the issues she raised.
17. In November 2021 the officer attended an ASB meeting with the Police and HA and discussed the concerns raised by Ms X. Following the meeting the officer told Ms X the level of issues were not considered to be ASB or criminal behaviour. But the HA would take the lead role and discuss with the neighbours concerned to try and find a resolution. The HA would report back to the officer and Police. Ms X was noted to be happy with the approach being taken.
18. Ms X raised issues about a neighbour’s dog in January 2022 to the ASB officer. The officer passed Ms X concerns to a community warden and advised Ms X to contact the HA with any further issues.
19. Ms X provided updates to the officer and the HA contacted Ms X. The HA advised the Council and Police in September 2022 of concerns Ms X raised about other HA neighbours. The Police and ASB officer found no evidence of ASB and offered Ms X mediation with her neighbours which she refused.
20. Ms X made an ASB case review application in September 2022 to the South Devon and Dartmoor Safety Partnership (partnership). The partnership wrote to Ms X and advised her application had been assessed by members including the Council, Police and HA. But it did not meet the ASB review threshold for any action. The ASB officer offered to hold a meeting with Ms X and other agencies to discuss her concerns further, but Ms X declined.
21. Ms X made more complaints in January 2023. The Council held a multi-agency meeting with the Police and HA. The HA agreed to continue as the lead agency to deal with the concerns. Ms X raised concerns with the ASB officer during February 2023. The ASB officer reminded Ms X to raise concerns with the HA and passed on her complaints about her neighbour’s dogs to the community warden.
22. The HA updated the Council and Police in March 2023. The ASB officer held a multi-agency meeting. The officer told Ms X her concerns had been reviewed again by the Council, HA, and Police. The jointly made decision was the main concerns were deemed to be a difference in living styles rather than ASB. And so not matters that could be progressed under ASB legislation. The officer confirmed her concerns about dogs had been passed to the Council’s Dog Control team.
23. Ms X continued to report issues during April and May 2023. The HA updated the Police and Council. The ASB officer contacted Ms X in June 2023 and explained the Council worked with the Police and they review reported incidents. There were tools to use such as Community Protection Warning notice. But following conversations with the HA and Police the notice was not deemed appropriate. The ASB officer confirmed counter reports made about Ms X by her neighbours and the HA would continue to take the lead as they were all tenants of the HA.
24. The ASB officer discussed Ms X’s concerns with the HA in August 2023 following further reports from Ms X of alleged ASB. The officer held a multi-agency meeting in October 2023 and noted Ms X and her neighbours continued to have issues. The officer sent a letter to Ms X explaining the multi-agency meeting did not consider the reported behaviour actionable using its statutory powers. And determined it was a disagreement between the lifestyles of the neighbours.
25. The officer explained the matter had been reviewed by the Council, HA, and Police. They had made a collective decision to issue them all with good neighbour agreements including to Ms X due to complaints received about her behaviour. The agreements would reinforce the work done by the HA to progress the case.

The Council’s comments on the case

26. The Council confirms it has a strong working relationship with the Police and HA under the partnership. They continually work together sharing information to manage cases effectively, reducing risk and devising plans and strategies to tackle adverse behaviour.
27. The partnership makes decisions as a collective to agree on a proportionate response to reported behaviour. It has a good understanding of each services’ threshold, limitations and cases managed effectively using the most appropriate tools and powers for each individual case.
28. The Council confirms officers, HA, and Police did a lot of work to address the concerns raised by Ms X. The Council and other agencies considered it was due to a difference in living styles between the neighbours. The Council reports that since issuing the good neighbour agreements there has been a vast improvement and reduction with reported concerns from all neighbours. The Council says the offer of a meeting between Ms X and all agencies remains open to her and it will continue to consider the ASB tools available to it if there are any further issues reported.

My assessment

29. The Ombudsman’s role is to review how councils have made decisions. We may criticise a council if, for example, it has not followed an appropriate procedure, not considered relevant information, or failed to properly explain why it has made a decision. We call this ‘fault’, and where we find it, we can consider how it has affected the outcome and ask the council to address this.
30. However, we do not provide a right of appeal against council decisions, and we cannot make operational or policy decisions on councils’ behalf. If we do not find fault in how a council has made a decision, then we cannot criticise it, no matter how strongly a complainant feels it is the wrong decision. We do not uphold complaints simply because someone disagrees with what a council has done.
31. In this case the Council provided documents to show it has responded to and investigated Ms X’s complaints of ASB according to its procedures and practices. The Council spoke to Ms X, the HA and Police and held multi agency meetings to discuss the concerns raised. The HA agreed to be the lead agency as the neighbours involved were all HA tenants. The documents show the Council supported the HA and it was involved in the ASB case review. The Council and agencies involved do not consider there is evidence of ASB in this case.
32. Ms X disagrees with the Council’s decision there is no evidence of ASB, but the decision is a matter of the officers’ professional judgement. We cannot question the merits of the decision itself without evidence of fault in the way it was made. I do not consider there is fault in this case.
33. This is because officers considered the information provided by Ms X and have contacted her to investigate her allegations. This is according to the Council’s general enforcement policy and the requirements of the Stautory Guidance. The Council discussed Ms X’s concerns with the Police and HA. This was appropriate action for the Council to take to establish whether there was ASB. Council officers did not consider there was evidence of ASB from the information obtained. So it has taken action to deal with the issues raised by requiring all involved including Ms X to sign a good neighbour agreement. This is a decision the officers are entitled to make. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council reached the decision from the documents I have seen. The action taken has been according to its policy on general enforcement to be fair, consistent and proportionate in its response.

Back to top

Final decision

34. I have completed my investigation. I have found no evidence of fault by the Council in the way it has responded to and dealt with Ms X’s complaints of ASB from her neighbours.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman