The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about how the Council handled her concerns about a neighbour’s aerial. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.
The complaint
Ms X complains about how the Council handled her complaint about a neighbour’s aerial. She says it is causing health and safety issues and would like it to be lowered to below roof height.
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 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 (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)).
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Ms X complains the glare from a neighbouring aerial is causing damage to her eyesight. The Council visited her property and viewed the aerial from her garden. It also considered other similar development nearby and decided it would not take enforcement action.
I will not investigate this complaint. It is for the planning authority to decide whether to act against planning breaches. The Council has decided that while this is a technical breach, it is an acceptable form of development. The Council has acted in line with its policy and legislation.
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.
Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman