Barrier to Complaints about Noise

From: Michael Dawson
Sent: 16 February 2017 13:32
To: Complaints
Subject: Noise – UK Docks, River Drive.

Dear Madam or Sir,

I wish to complain about the noise from the slipway, yesterday 15th Feb:

  1. firstly a banging noise metal on metal (something like scale removal) repeated several times during the morning. This was sufficiently loud to carry across the noise of the factories immediately below where I live.
  2. secondly the noise of the compressor used for cleaning/sandblasting. This was observed while waiting next to the Tubular Office Furniture works.

Yours sincerely
Michael Dawson

One can see from the highlighted comments below that Mr Burrell has abused or corrupted the Councils Complaints Procedure.

From: Kevin Burrell
To: Michal Dawson
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 3:41 PM
Subject: RE: Noise – UK Docks, River Drive. [RESTRICTED]

This email has been classified as: RESTRICTED.

RESTRICTED is used that in the hope that we, the protesters, won’t confer with one another. If you are alone he can accuse you of making allegations and it also reduces the chances of the abuse being discovered.

Dear Mr Dawson

I have been forwarded your email below which is a complaint of noise from the UK Docks site.

I would not be able to take any retrospective action in relation to banging noise on metal, I would assert that this is reasonable for a boat repair yard.

The Council have allowed the boat yard to become a ship yard (that ferries or Border Patrol boats are called boats is irrelevant) and also he, by his lack of action, has allowed either or both:

1)the noise makers to deny the offence;
2)the investigating officer to assert that no offence has taken place

As you are aware, I received complaints from other residents with regards to the generator, although I would suggest that the works are those that could be reasonably expected of a boat repair facility through the day, I have asked the yard manager of UK docks to ensure that any equipment that is brought on site has the appropriate mitigation methods installed. In this instance he has advised me that the generator had a silencer installed.
I am aware that the generator was removed yesterday, and therefore will not be able to carry out any further investigations into this matter until such time that a generator is brought back on site for this operational activity.

The offending generator was removed so that Mr Burrell could not judge whether appropriate mitigation had been carried out. i.e. whether a silencer had been fitted.

I have raised a complaint reference number 27392 for this matter, however I see no option but to close it once you have acknowledged this email as I have been advised that the generator has been removed from site.

The council are currently use six figure numbers starting with 30 so Mr Burrell has, by using 27392*, effectively removed all traces of the complaint. Reporting his misconduct to Senior Management, the Chief Executive, the Ombudsman or the MP becomes difficult if not impossible.

Kind Regards
Kevin

* at first sight this appears to be a typographical error but when I wished to raise the subject of noise because we had been woken by it on that Sunday, 18th December, Mr Burrell was insistent that I completed the time-sheet for 272189 which I discovered later belonged to another person and that it had been closed some time before.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.