In 2017, pianist James Carrabino and his family won a landmark appeal against the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC) in a case that had plagued the latter half of his teenage years. Three years earlier the family had received a noise abatement notice by the council ordering them to limit Carrabino and his younger brother’s piano practice to just one hour a day in 20-minute increments.
After a battle that had cost the taxpayer “well in excess of £100,000” at the time of judgement, the decision that piano playing was a “normal domestic activity” was upheld and the council was forced to pay the Carrabinos £61,509.86.
The consideration of whether music practice is a nuisance has long been an obstacle for those practising at home. However, it’s not until the council notice arrives that musicians are faced with the realities of this subjective decision. High financial costs and an inability to work from home resulting in a loss of income can make the situation intolerable. So, what do musicians need to know when served with a noise abatement notice?
Once that deadline is missed, it’s very tough to have any sort of recourse from that
James Carrabino
Noise abatement notice vs community protection notice
In most cases, musicians will receive a noise abatement notice from the council if complaints about their practice have been made. This requires the noise to reduce or stop and prohibits its occurrence or recurrence. Failure to comply could result in the council’s removal of ‘noise-making equipment’ as in the case of classical pianist John Hudspith, who had his piano removed by Coventry council in 2015.
However, now some musicians are being served a community protection notice (CPN). This is designed to stop a person, business or organisation from committing anti-social behaviour which “spoils the community’s quality of life”, putting even more limitations on musicians to practise in their own home.
It’s important to note that CPNs are more serious. Solicitor Piers Desser says: “The big differences are that the failure to comply with abatement notice can only be heard in the Magistrates’ court and is a non-imprisonable offence. CPNs are being used by the authorities to tackle what they views as problem cases (protestors) – sometimes controversially.”
Don’t wait
From the moment you receive a noise abatement notice you only have 21 days to appeal, so it’s critical you act immediately. “It’s just a formality you can do without a lawyer,” Carrabino says. “Just say, ‘I intend to appeal this’, and then find out what your options are from there because once that deadline is missed, it’s very tough to have any sort of recourse from that.”
Once the abatement has been issued the recipient must abide by it, even if it is under appeal. If no appeal is lodged, then the recipient is restricted indefinitely. If the council finds the recipient in breach of the notice, then they are at risk of a hefty fine and even a High Court injunction.
In Carrabino’s case, the abatement originally stipulated that both brothers could only practise for a “maximum period of 20 minutes at any one time, for a total of 60 minutes per day”. Justice Roscoe found this “unreasonable”, increasing the amount to five hours a day Monday to Saturday with three hours on a Sunday between 9am and 9pm.
Read: After the applause
Read more advice and practical tips here
Embarking on the legal route
After the abatement notice has been received and appealed, further legal advice must be obtained as soon as possible. However, fees are costly and with the average orchestral musician in the UK earning roughly £33,000 legal aid is not an option for many musicians.
Musician Fiona Fey, who was served with a noise abatement notice in November 2022, found a solicitor through her online petition. The solicitor, and father of a musician, told Fey: “This is going to be a long process, it could be quite costly, and there’s no guarantee that you’ll be able to recover your costs or you’ll be able to win.”
As the living situation for Fey had become impossible, she chose to move. For the Carrabinos, their Kensington townhouse had been the family home for 12 years prior to the abatement notice. Although financially secure, the parents of two teenage boys wanted to keep costs as low as possible. “A friend at our son’s school was a QC,” Annette says. “He advised the Direct Access route. It’s a lot more work on you as the person who is appealing the notice because you have to be essentially the solicitor. You must write all the letters and submit the documents to the court.” In the transcript for the judgement, Annette and her husband estimated between “500 and 1000 hours of work” over two years was spent, “defending” their sons’ “right to practice”.
They both spoke at the same time over me over each other. It was really intimidating
Fiona Fey
Document everything
In both cases, the actions of the councils were brought into question. “The Judge decided that the council was unreasonable in their behaviour,” James says. “It seemed to try to bully us into not pursuing it.”
Fey, who lived on her own in Lewisham at the time, documented every encounter she had with the EHOs. This proved invaluable to the freelance musician and teacher, whose career relies on reputation. In recordings taken from a home visit, the EHOs can be heard raising their voices at the calm Fey. “They both spoke at the same time over me over each other. It was really intimidating, and I told them this,” she explains. “They show up at your door. They show you badges. They make you feel like you’re like you’ve committed the worst kind of crime. I was sitting down, they were standing up. When I offered them a seat, they said, ‘No, we’re not going to sit. We don’t want to give the impression we’re here to make friends’. It was really aggressive.”
Lewisham council said they did not recognise the most recent claims made by Fey, stating: “We do not make decisions like this lightly and have tried to avoid enforcement, which is only ever done as a last resort. A statutory nuisance is defined as a disturbance that interferes with someone’s right to enjoy their home or is damaging to someone’s health. It is much more than just an annoyance or being aware of something, which is why we would always assess each situation individually.” They refused to comment on the specifics of the interaction with EHOs.
We didn’t want attacks on the kids so we didn’t talk to the press
Annette Carrabino
Should you go public?
In these situations, both Fey and the Carrabinos contemplated going public. Fey publicly launched a petition to protect the right to play musical instruments. “The support from the community has been great, everyone has been outraged,” she says. But as with anything in the public eye, there is always room for scrutiny. An article in the Daily Mail left Fey dealing with an unfair rebuttal from the council which was “completely untrue” that she would later defend, as well as additional information about herself that were equally “untrue”.
As a mother of two young boys Annette chose to stay away from the media, instead focusing on getting support from local MPs. “We didn’t want attacks on the kids so we didn’t talk to the press,” Annette says. However, attempts to drum up support from her MPs proved fruitless as they were unwilling to “rock the boat within their political parties”.
For all musicians who have gone through this process, one thing is clear: the law must change. “Environmental officers are entitled to determine what is a statutory nuisance,” Annette says. This autonomy over a subjective issue is a huge cause for concern. Alongside the petition, musicians have been writing to their MPs for help and Annette urges unions to do more to protect their players and take the lead. What constitutes a nuisance might be subjective, but for musicians practice is essential.
Read: A career without boarders: Your guide to moving abroad
Read more advice and practical tips here