Neighbour complaints

Weathergirl_76

This is my experience of contact from my local council regarding noise. 

Albeit, this was around 18 years ago. 

I got a letter from the council, worded very formally that I had been reported for noise. It implied that the person who had reported me, had been told to monitor the noise and report to the council. It was in relation to my dogs barking. 

I was mortified and contacted the council the next day. They told me they have to send a letter out based on the report received. This is made without proof as such. The person making the report is told to keep a diary. The council told me 95% of the time, this doesn’t happen and the issue resolves itself. 

I questioned how I could be accused of something without proof, as what is acceptable noise to one person, may not be to another who likes it quiet. They told me they don’t install any equipment and if I wanted to see it for myself, to pretend to go to work and sit I the car outside and monitor it. 

They would not tell me who had made a report, as I asked. 

I then went to speak to my neighbours, who told me they did occasionally hear the dogs barking but it didn’t bother them. So someone was clearly not telling me the truth. It unfortunately made me see my neighbours in a different light, and after that I didn’t really get very involved. It really upset me and I was very disappointed. 

I think they are assuming it is you as you complained to them about the noise, which is a lot more upfront than my neighbours. If they feel it was a malicious report they can re-contact the council or police, but I think it’s unlikely. I cannot see how they would get your details from the council. This would be a breach of data protection at the very least. 

Section62

Emmia said:

Section62 said:

amexblue said:

...It's possible they might suspect but you have to pay for a request. Are they likely to waste their money?

You don't have to pay for a FOI request unless the work required to provide the information is excessive - assessed by the cost exceeding the "appropriate limit".  Responding to the question "Who made the complaint?" won't exceed the "appropriate limit", but the council should apply one of the exemptions to allow them to not give that information.

If the cost limit is exceeded, you don't get the option of paying for the FOI, it's either denied on cost grounds, or you have to narrow your request to bring it into scope.

All the local authorities I've dealt with have given people the option of paying.  This was in accordance with the FOI Act and the Regulations.  The "appropriate limit" is the level above which the organisation can decline a request or they can ask the requester to pay the costs of providing the information (in addition to the disbursements)

Below the "appropriate limit" the organisation is obliged to deal with the request, but may only charge for disbursements.

See the ICO guidance "Fees that may be charged when the cost of compliance exceeds the appropriate limit" here - https://ico.org.uk/media/1635/fees_cost_of_compliance_exceeds_appropriate_limit.pdf

And the currently applicable Regulations for the Appropriate Limit and Fees -

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004/3244/contents

Emmia said:

The limit is done on an hourly rate of x grade level, and it takes very few hours of work to hit. That said the council should refuse to release info with your name under one of the exemptions.

The Regulations provide that the amount charged for staff time (for the purposes of estimating the cost of compliance or charging the requester) shall be calculated using the flat rate of £25 per person per hour, regardless of whether the person doing the work is at a higher grade.

The "appropriate limit" for a local authority is currently £450 - equating to 18 hours @£25/hour, but fewer hours if other allowable costs are also involved.

Checking a customer complaints or noise complaints database to find the name of the person who made a noise complaint about a specified address within the last 12 months is going to take a matter of minutes - a local authority will never be in a position to reasonably claim this requires anything approaching 18 hours work.

However IMV,  the request should be declined on the basis of one of the statutory exemptions.