LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other

London Borough of Richmond upon Thames

22-004-521 · Environment And Regulation › Other · Decision date: 21 July 2022 · View Richmond upon Thames Council scorecard

Full Decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has not dealt effectively with complaints about noise nuisance due to the complainant’s ethnic identity and nationality. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

Mr X complains the Council has not dealt effectively with his complaints about noise nuisance. He says this is due to discrimination because of his ethnic identity and nationality.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

The Ombudsman investigates 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 with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

Mr X has complained about noise nuisance to the Council since 2020. He says the Council has not dealt with his complaints properly because of his ethnic identity and nationality.

The Council has explained it completed the following actions to investigate Mr X’s complaints about noise nuisance: It visited Mr X’s property in June 2021 to witness the noise. It did witness noise, but the officer was not of the view this amounted to a statutory nuisance. The officer advised Mr X he could take civil action against his neighbour.

In January 2022, the Council visited Mr X’s property to try and witness the noise nuisance and asked him to keep a noise diary.

The Council wrote to Mr X’s neighbour to highlight the alleged noise.

The Council asked Mr X whether he wanted noise monitoring equipment installed in his property. Mr X did not accept this offer.

The Council has a duty to take reasonable steps to investigate complaints about noise that could be a statutory nuisance. It is for the Council to decide whether a statutory nuisance is happening.

In this case, I am satisfied there is evidence the Council has taken reasonable steps to investigate Mr X’s complaints about noise nuisance before making its decision the reported noise does not amount to a statutory nuisance. Therefore, the Council has acted in line with its statutory duty and there is no evidence the Council treated Mr X’s complaints any differently to how it ordinarily would.

As the Council has acted as it should, there is insufficient evidence to support Mr X’s view the Council has discriminated against him. Therefore, I will not investigate this complaint as there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Final decision

We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman