LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other

Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council

22-010-044 · Environment And Regulation › Antisocial Behaviour · Decision date: 21 November 2022 · View Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council scorecard

Full Decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to issues of antisocial behaviour and noise nuisance. This is because there is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part.

The complaint

The complainant, who I will refer to as Miss B, complains that the Council has failed to take effective action in response to her reports of antisocial behaviour and noise nuisance.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

Miss B says she has suffered from antisocial behaviour and noise nuisance over a period of years. She says the perpetrator is her neighbour. She complains that the Council has failed to properly address the matter.

When considering complaints about antisocial behaviour, it is not for the Ombudsman to express a view on whether the alleged behaviour has occurred, or whether it has reached the level at which it is appropriate to take formal action. These are matters for the council. Rather, it is to consider whether there is evidence of fault in the way the council considered the evidence and reached a decision on how to proceed. In this case, there is no such evidence.

In its letter to Miss B setting out its decision to close the case, and in its response to her subsequent complaint, the Council detailed the issues Miss B has raised and its response to them. It properly set out why it did not regard the matters as actionable. The Council’s position appears defensible and there is no indication of fault in the way it made its decision to close the case.

In the absence of evidence of fault on the part of the Council. The Ombudsman cannot criticise the decision it has taken, or intervene to substitute an alternative view. That being the case, we will not investigate the complaint.

Final decision

We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman