Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Mr X’s complaint of light pollution from a neighbouring property affecting his home. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about light pollution from a neighbour’s home affecting the enjoyment of his own home and also causing a traffic hazard on the highway. He also complained about his neighbour extending his driveway without permission from the Council.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council’s response.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X says he reported light pollution from a neighbouring house and the Council failed to take action. His complaint to the highway authority about the effect of the lighting on the public highway resulted in him being referred to the Environmental Services Department. The light source was not on the public highway so the authority had no powers to take action under highways legislation. Light pollution is a statutory nuisance matter. Mr X says the junction near his home is an accident black spot but the highway authority told him there is no evidence of any personal injury accidents in the past 5 years which is the measure of highway hazards.
6. The Council’s Environmental Services Department investigated his complaint and concluded that there was no evidence of a statutory nuisance. It also says the lighting only illuminated the footway in part, not the carriageway. If a Council finds evidence of a statutory nuisance it is required to serve an abatement notice. This was not the case here so it could not take further action.
7. Mr X complained to us about his neighbour’s driveway extension in complaint 23003441 which was closed in 2023. We will not investigate a matter which has bene previously considered and decided.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Mr X’s complaint of light pollution from a neighbouring property affecting his home. there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman