THE HIGHLAND COUNCIL
TEC SERVICES - ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
NOISE COMPLAINT PROTOCOL
1.0 PURPOSE
1.1 The purpose of the protocol is to ensure that:
1.1.1 all members of the public who contact Environmental Health personnel within TEC Services to complain about noise have their complaint dealt with efficiently, professionally and within a reasonable period of time.
1.1.2 all complaints are dealt with in such a manner which ensures a fair, consistent and effective approach.
1.1.3 all complaints are recorded so as to comply with the requirements of performance indicator information.
1.2 Environmental Health personnel within TEC Services discharge the Council’s statutory duty to administer noise complaints. The Environmental Protection Act 1990 Part 3 imposes a duty on the Council to detect and deal with statutory nuisance in relation to noise which originates within its area. Environmental Health personnel must investigate the complaint and, where satisfied that a statutory nuisance exists or is likely to recur or occur, must serve notice on the person responsible for the nuisance.
2.0 POLICY
2.1 Our policy is to deal with all complaints about noise in an effective and efficient manner within a reasonable period of time.
2.2 The aim is to set out procedures and guidance which will allow us to undertake our statutory duties and enable us to meet objectives.
2.3 The objectives are:
a. to respond to noise complaints as quickly as possible;
b. to obtain accurate and relevant details from the complainant;
c. to advise complainants on the course of action appropriate to their complaint;
d. to ensure that all complaints shall be advised in writing of the outcome of any
investigations
e. to enable the Council to take legal action where required.
2.4 The target is to respond* to all noise complaints within 1 day (calendar); *(in the
case of domestic noise complaints visiting the complainant or noise source)
3.0 NOISE CONTROL SERVICE
3.1 The service which the Environmental Health discipline provides in exercising its noise control function is both reactive and pro-active. The Environmental Protection Act requires the Council not only to deal with noise complaints but to have their area inspected from time to time to detect noise nuisances. Pro-actively, Environmental Health personnel respond to consultations in relation to planning and licensing applications with a view to ensuring as far as reasonably practicable that potential nuisance arising from proposed developments or licensed functions is avoided or controlled. The experience gained by Environmental Health personnel through the years in dealing with noise complaints and the use of specific noise criteria assists in the prevention and control of unsuitable development or events.
4.0 NOISE COMPLAINTS
4.1 When a complaint is received the complainant should ideally be referred to an Environmental Health Officer, or a Technical Assistant who specialises in noise complaints. That Officer, or in his or her absence, an Administrative Officer, shall take, record, and log details of the complaint. Where the complaint has been passed on by a Councillor or someone acting on behalf of the complainant, an Environmental Health Officer or APSO shall endeavour to speak to the complainant on the day ( the complaint has been brought to his/her attention . Complainants' confidentiality shall be respected at all times, as far as is reasonably practicable, and Officers shall deal with all complainants in a patient and courteous manner.
4.2 Officers should enquire whether complainants have already made any prior approach to the person/s causing the noise. If no such approach has been made, and where amenable to such, the complainant should be encouraged to resolve the matter by a direct personal approach or avail themselves of the services of a mediation service In that event a copy of the Service leaflet on "Neighbour problems" should be forwarded or given to the complainant. Complainants should not be advised that they must approach their neighbours. Where they do opt to approach their neighbour they should be advised that if this approach does not succeed they should advise the officer accordingly.
4.3 Where a complaint has been referred to the Environmental Health Section by a Councillor, MSP, MP or MEP, then such person shall be kept apprised of the progress of any investigation and its outcome.
5.0 RECORDING THE COMPLAINT
5.1 Details of the complaint should be recorded on Flare. The complainant may give the necessary information by phone, or arrangements can be made to visit the complainant at his/her home.
6.0 ASSESSMENT OF COMPLAINT
61 Normally the first assessment of the complaint is made when the complaint log is filled in. The complainant’s details are recorded and the complainant is asked to describe the noise. In most cases, people complaining about noise will have a clear understanding of what the noise complaint is and where it originates. (It should be borne in mind that lay people may have a limited vocabulary in terms of acoustics and Officers should be aware that the complainant’s understanding of terms such as low or high frequency may not accord with their own.) From the complainant's description, the Officer should classify the type of noise e.g. entertainment, industrial, domestic etc., on the complaint log.
6.2 Where it appears to an officer in the course of a complaint being made or
investigated that either the complainant's ability to communicate (due to language
or disability) or that of any person who may be the subject of enforcement action,
may be a barrier to compliance, the officer shall:
· request such person to have a family member, colleague or friend present at a subsequent meeting to assist with translation or interpretation;
· where the above is not possible, or where formal action is envisaged, arrange for a translator or other appropriate person to be present at a subsequent meeting;
· where appropriate, enclose with all communications an offer of help with translation written in the person's own language;
· provide, where available, information leaflets etc. in a form appropriate to the person's needs.
6.3 At this stage it may be appropriate to advise the complainant of other agencies who may also be able or more appropriate to assist or deal with his/her complaint.
6.4 The Local Authority has a duty to investigate complaints under the Environmental Protection Act. However depending on the description of the complaint it may be clear that no remedy may be available in terms of this legislation e.g. normal road traffic causing annoyance or children playing in a school or play park.
6.5 In addition, some noise complaints because of the infrequency of occurrence or because they are intermittent in nature may be difficult to deal with because of the problem in gathering evidence. For example, a dog which barks from time to time, neighbours who have occasional parties, or one-off unadvertised noise events which are unlikely to recur for some considerable time, if ever. In these types of complaints it may be appropriate to refer complainants to another agency e.g. the Police. In the case of neighbours playing loud musical equipment, the Civic Government (Scotland) Act which is enforced by the Police, may provide a more immediate remedy than could an Environmental Health Officer who will require to visit, measure the noise and gather evidence of nuisance. Similarly barking dog complaints can be dealt with by the complainant applying direct to the Sheriff Court. In addition, where the complaint arises within Council or publicly-owned houses and is due to the action of unreasonable neighbours, Council or Housing Association managers may have powers to take action in terms of tenancy rules, and may even, as a last resort, seek a court order for eviction. If noise from private or public sector tenants is recurring and extreme or is associated with other anti-social behaviour the Council's Housing Service may consider it appropriate to seek an Anti-Social Behaviour Order to abate such behaviour. Officers should discuss such cases with the Area Housing Manager.
6.6 However before any complainant is referred to another agency it is incumbent upon the investigating Officer to listen to the full details of the complaint before coming to the conclusion that such referral is the most appropriate course of action. In some cases it may well be appropriate to refer the complainant to another agency so as to secure a speedier resolution of the complaint, but it may also be necessary to investigate the complaint simultaneously in terms of the statutory powers available in The Environmental Protection Act 1990.
6.7 When full details have been taken of the complaint it will be clear whether a survey is required to assess the noise. The survey may require a subjective and objective measurement of the noise and the complainant should be asked when it might be best to measure the noise. An appointment should be made to undertake the noise measurement at a time when the alleged nuisance is likely to occur.
7.0 NOISE SURVEY
7.1 The noise survey will normally determine whether action can be taken regarding the complaint. The action required will be determined when the Officers investigating the complaint have had the opportunity to confirm the existence of noise nuisance and agreed that the Council has a statutory responsibility to take action. Objective assessments will normally form the basic part of most noise complaint investigations and these assessments will be appraised using appropriate noise standards. Subjective assessment is equally important and the opinion of the investigating officers will play a major part in determining whether nuisance exists. Officers shall undertake all assessments in a wholly professional manner so as to ensure that any subsequent action based on such assessments is not undermined.
7.2 In many cases, out-of-hours surveys will be required to adequately investigate complaints. The use of the MATRON or equivalent system which links the noise meter to a recording device may be considered for out-of-hours irregular nuisances. This may provide valuable back-up information and in some cases may be used in court proceedings.
7.3 Where the MATRON system is to be used without the noise source’s knowledge
it shall be determined if authorisation under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers
(Scotland) Act 2000 is required. The following practical three stage test shall be
followed. Every question asked needs to be answered "yes". It is only at this point
that a RIP(S)A authorisation needs to be considered:-
1. Is it likely that information will be obtained, from and about an
identifiable person, in circumstances where that person might reasonably
expect privacy in relation to it?
(Only if both of the following questions below can be answered in the
affirmative is this part of the test met)
(a) Are there reasonable indications that any of the participants
to the activity desires it not to be seen or heard by others?
(b) Can the participants reasonably expect that the activity will
not be seen or heard by others?
2. Is it likely that this information would be biographical about that
person in a significant sense?
3. Will the information be recorded in some permanent form?
7.4 Officers who learn of any personal information regarding any person in the course of such an investigation shall not record any such information that is not directly necessary for the purposes of the investigation and shall not reveal such information to any other party save under order of a court of law.
7.5 It is important that all appropriate details from the survey and subsequent surveys are documented and included in the file. Noise levels and subjective assessments made at each survey should be included in the file. All data should be signed and dated by the investigating officers and any notes outwith record sheets shall be kept in the officers' official numbered notebooks in accordance with operational instructions on evidence gathering.
8.0 ASSESSMENT OF NUISANCE
8.1 When the noise complained of has been heard and/or measured by Officers an assessment requires to be made as to whether the noise is a statutory nuisance and what action should be taken.
8.2 If after three visits no evidence has been gathered to support nuisance, if deemed appropriate, no further action should be taken regarding that particular complaint.
8.3 Should there be a material change in circumstances, at a later date, the complainant may make a further complaint and a fresh investigation should be initiated.
8.4 Assessing noise complaints is both subjective and objective. Subjectively, the opinion of the Officer is important in describing the type of noise and the effect it has on the complainant. Objectively, the noise can be measured and the levels compared to noise criteria which are appropriate to the type of noise.
9.0 NOISE CRITERIA
9.1 There are noise criteria which may be used in specific instances. The use of appropriate noise criteria will be determined by the type of noise e.g. industrial, entertainment and the effect the noise has on the complainant e.g. sleep disturbance, communication, listening to television etc. In addition, the type of property within which the alleged nuisance takes place is also relevant e.g. house, office, residential home.