Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
6 Complaint Upheld by the LGO Service Relating to a Complaint About Noise PDF 406 KB
Minutes:
Matter for
Decision
The Local Government &
Social Care Ombudsman (LGO) found there was fault by the Council “but not
causing injustice”, in relation to how the Council investigated a noise
complaint from a large item of commercial equipment within the city.
The LGO found the Council
at fault for how it initially investigated the noise complaint, which it
determined to not be a statutory nuisance. However, this did not cause the
complainant a personal injustice, as the Council subsequently acted without
fault in its further noise investigation work relating to the commercial
equipment; and which came to the same conclusion, ie it was not a statutory noise nuisance.
There was no legal
definition of a statutory noise nuisance, but further general information on
this subject matter may be found in the footnote below.
The LGO also formally
accepted that all the identified service improvement actions, offered by the
Council to the complainant, had been fully actioned by the Council.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Climate Change, Environment & City Centre
Noted the findings of the
Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman in respect of this case and the
actions taken by the Council in response to these findings.
Reason for the Decision
As set out in the Officer’s report.
Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected
Not applicable.
Scrutiny
Considerations
The Committee received a report from the Environmental Health Manager.
The Environmental Health Manager said the following in response to
Members’ questions:
i.
This was the first complaint against the Noise
Complaint Service referred to the LGO, or upheld by
LGO.
ii.
The Noise Complaint Service received several
complaints which officers triaged to ascertain if they were statutory noise
issues that the Council could take action against. The
Council were unable to take action against other noise
types.
iii.
The complaints received by Environmental Service
were generally because people were unhappy about something affecting them, not
because they were unhappy with the Noise Complaint Service.
iv.
Officers usually visited on their own noise sources
that were the subject of a complaint. A colleague was taken if the situation
became more serious and a second opinion was required. A second officer was not
requested by the (lone) officer investigating the noise in this complaint.
v.
It was down to an Officer’s professional opinion if
noise was designated as a statutory nuisance or not.
The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendation.
The Executive Councillor
approved the recommendation.
Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any
Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.