Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with his reports of a neighbour blocking a shared lobby. Some of the issues date back more than 12 months and are therefore late. In respect of more recent events, the Council has decided the threshold for anti-social behaviour has not been met, and Mr X says his local councillors resolved the issue. There is not enough evidence of fault for us to question the Council’s decision and an investigation would not achieve anything more. Mr X is unhappy with how the Council has handled his complaint, but we will not investigate complaint handling as a standalone issue.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the way the Council dealt with his reports of antisocial behaviour. He says his neighbour has been blocking a shared lobby for over 2 years. He feels frustrated about the Council’s lack of response and wants them to take action.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and information from the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Some of Mr X’s concerns date to 2022, so some of Mr X’s complaint is therefore late and I see no reason he could not have complained to us sooner. I will not consider the parts of Mr X’s complaint which are late.
8. The Council has considered Mr X’s recent reports of his neighbour blocking the lobby, and decided the issue did not meet the threshold for an anti-social behaviour investigation. This is a decision it is entitled to make. We are not an appeal body and cannot overturn the Council’s decision if it has considered the evidence appropriately.
9. The Council has said the lobby is the joint responsibility of Mr X and his neighbour, and the issue amounts to their disagreement about the way the lobby should be used. Mr X also said the problem is resolved. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making to justify an investigation and there is nothing more we would be able to achieve for Mr X.
10. Mr X has also recently reported rubbish from his neighbour being left in front of his property. Mr X should continue to liaise with the Council as it is in the best position to be able to deal with this.
11. Mr X is also unhappy with the way the Council handled his complaints and says he felt ignored. The Council admitted a delay in responding to his complaint, but it is not a good use of our resources to investigate complaint-handling alone if we are not investigating the substantive matter.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is late and there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. There is also no worthwhile outcome we could achieve by further investigation, and we will not investigate complaint handling as a standalone matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman