My Neighbor Keeps Calling the Police on Me — What Can I Do in South Carolina?

A homeowner in Washington State — not South Carolina, and the difference matters, as you will see below — described the end stage of a neighbor feud in a public legal-advice thread. After a fight over cameras and noise, the neighbor began calling 911 every single day to report gunshots at the poster's address. Neighbors nearby told investigators they heard nothing. The caller later pled guilty to 3 of 19 counts of using emergency services inappropriately, under Washington law.

Most South Carolina homeowners who land on this page are at the earlier, grinding stage. The patrol car slows down in front of the house again. An officer knocks, polite and tired, and says a neighbor reported noise, or a dog, or a car parked wrong, or children playing too loud. The officer looks around, finds nothing, and leaves. Then it happens again next week.

This post is for the homeowner on the receiving end. It covers who is doing what, when a string of calls stops being a nuisance and starts being a legal pattern, and where the remedies actually live in South Carolina: the two false-report statutes, the harassment article, the call-history record itself, and the civil claims — with their real limits stated plainly. For the full menu of claims against a harassing neighbor, start with the flagship guide in this series, Can I Sue My Neighbor for Harassment in South Carolina?, and for the wider picture of homeowner rights inside an association, see the South Carolina HOA and POA homeowner rights guide.

It usually starts small: noise, toddlers, and a lawn

Read the public question-and-answer threads on this topic and the same fact patterns repeat. In one widely read thread, a parent wrote that the neighbor calls the police when a two-year-old cries, runs around, or plays, and kept calling after a newborn arrived. In another, the poster wrote that the neighbor "calls the police on me constantly for no particular reason," and listed the reasons given: the grass was too long, and the neighbor's own child was allowed to sleep at the poster's home.

Notice what those calls have in common. None of them describes a crime in progress. Each one takes an ordinary fact of family life — a crying toddler, a long lawn, a sleepover — and restates it as a disturbance. That restatement is the whole tactic. The caller does not need the officer to find anything. The visit itself is the point: the lights in the driveway, the knock your kids hear, the story your other neighbors tell themselves about your house.

If that is your situation, two things are true at once. You are not imagining the harm, and South Carolina law does have things to say about it. But the law draws a hard line between a caller who is wrong, even repeatedly wrong, and a caller who knowingly lies. Almost everything below turns on that line.

Why does my neighbor keep calling the police on me for no reason?

Start with the honest answer. The calls usually serve one of three purposes.

Sometimes the caller truly believes the noise, the dog, or the parking job violates a rule and wants an official record of it. That caller is annoying. That caller is not, without more, breaking the law.

Sometimes the call is leverage in a different fight — a fence line, a parking space, an HOA election, a tree. The police visit is a way to raise the cost of the argument for the other side.

And sometimes the call is the harassment itself. The caller has learned that a phone call produces flashing lights at your door at no cost to the caller, and uses the police as the instrument. South Carolina's harassment law has a word for the shape of that conduct. A "pattern" means "two or more acts occurring over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose." That is the definition in S.C. Code § 16-3-1700(D), and it is the frame a court, an officer, or a lawyer will use to look at your situation: not call by call, but as a course of conduct with one purpose running through it.

You do not have to guess which of the three callers lives next to you. The record will show it. That is why the sections below keep returning to the same practical point: build the record first, and let the record sort the mistaken caller from the lying one.

Why the officers still have to come to your house

Homeowners ask this with real frustration: the same officer has been to the house six times and found nothing six times, so why come a seventh time?

Because dispatch does not get to decide your neighbor is lying. A call that reports a possible crime or a possible emergency gets a response, and the responding officer usually does not know the history of the address beyond what the screen shows. A department that taught its officers to shrug off repeat calls from one address would, sooner or later, shrug off the one call that was real.

There is a second reason. South Carolina law shields good-faith reporting. Section 16-3-1820 gives a person who reports alleged harassment or stalking, files a criminal complaint, or takes part in a court proceeding under the harassment article, acting in good faith, immunity from criminal and civil liability that might otherwise follow, and good faith is presumed unless it is rebutted. The honest neighbor who hears a real fight through the wall is protected, and should be.

The practical result is the one you have already seen: the calls keep producing visits until the record shows something more than one neighbor's word against another's. Your job is to bring that record. An officer or a supervisor looking at a printed call history — twelve calls, twelve unfounded visits, each one timed within a day of a fence dispute or an HOA meeting — is no longer looking at a he-said, she-said. That officer is looking at a pattern, and a pattern is what the statutes below are built on.

When a call crosses the line: the two false-report crimes

South Carolina has two statutes aimed at the lying caller, and the difference between them matters.

The first is S.C. Code § 16-17-722. It makes it unlawful to knowingly file a false police report. If the false report claims a felony was committed, the false report is itself a felony, punishable by imprisonment of not more than five years, or a fine of not more than $1,000, or both. If the false report claims a misdemeanor, the false report is a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment of not more than thirty days, or a fine of not more than $500, or both. The judge may also order the caller to pay restitution to the investigating agency for the costs of the investigation. Pause on that last part. Every unfounded visit to your house burned officer time, and the statute lets a court send that bill to the person who caused it.

The second is S.C. Code § 16-17-725. It makes it unlawful to knowingly make a false complaint to a law-enforcement officer about the alleged commission of a crime by another person. The penalty is a misdemeanor fine of not more than $200, or imprisonment of not more than thirty days, or both. The same section also covers giving false information to a rescue squad or fire department about a health emergency or fire, and misrepresenting your identity to an officer during a stop or to dodge arrest.

The distinction between the two statutes is the distinction between filing and telling. Section 16-17-722 requires a filed report. Section 16-17-725 covers the false complaint or statement made to an officer without that filing. A neighbor whose weapon is the phone call — ring dispatch, make the claim, hang up — is often closer to § 16-17-725 territory, while a neighbor who signs a written report about a crime that never happened is in § 16-17-722 territory. Both statutes share the same hinge word: knowingly. The State must be able to show the caller knew the claim was false, not merely that the claim turned out to be wrong.

That is also why the Washington case at the top of this post does not transfer neatly. The Washington caller's plea rested on Washington's misuse-of-emergency-services law. South Carolina has no identical charge. The South Carolina analogues are §§ 16-17-722 and 16-17-725, and both demand proof of knowledge. Daily calls reporting gunshots that no other neighbor heard, on a street where nothing was ever found, is the kind of record that can carry that proof. Two mistaken noise calls cannot.

Your best evidence is the call log, not the argument at the door

Homeowners in this spot tend to invest in the wrong contest. They try to win the conversation on the porch, explaining to the seventh officer why the neighbor is crazy. The porch conversation evaporates. The call history does not.

Every call to your address creates a record: the date, the time, what was reported, what unit responded, and what the officer found. That record is the spine of every remedy in this post. It proves the pattern that § 16-3-1700 requires — two or more acts showing a continuity of purpose. It shows timing, and timing is often the tell: calls that land the evening after an HOA board meeting, or the day after you reported the caller's own violation. And it shows outcomes. A column of visits that all end with nothing found is the closest thing to a neutral witness you will ever get, because the police department wrote it, not you.

Build the file in four steps.

First, keep your own log alongside the official one. Write down each visit the day it happens: date, time, what the officer said the complaint was, what the officer found, and anything that happened between you and the neighbor in the days just before. Short, flat, factual entries. A log written in anger reads badly a year later. A log written like a ledger reads like the truth.

Second, ask for the official history. Contact the agency that responds to your address through its non-emergency line or records office and ask how to obtain the call history for your address. Agencies handle the form of the request differently, and caller-identifying details in a dispatch record may be limited, so ask what the agency can release and in what form. What you want most is the call-by-call list: dates, times, complaint types, and dispositions.

Third, be calm and boring at the door, every time. Step out, answer the questions, let the officer see that nothing is happening, and thank the officer for coming. Homeowners who perform outrage for the responding officer hand the caller exactly the scene the caller wanted. Homeowners who are pleasant and brief become, visit after visit, the credible side of the file.

Fourth, make one organized contact of your own. Once you have a run of unfounded calls — not after the first one — use the non-emergency line to ask how the agency prefers to receive a pattern summary from a homeowner. Then deliver a short written summary with the call history attached. You are not asking the agency to ignore future calls. You are giving the agency the context it cannot see from a dispatch screen, and creating a dated record that you reported the pattern as a pattern.

Can I sue my neighbor for calling the police on me?

This is the question the public threads ask most, and it deserves a straight answer rather than a hopeful one.

Start with defamation, because that is the claim most homeowners reach for. A false statement to the police that you committed a crime sounds like a textbook defamation case. South Carolina law puts a gate in front of it. Communications to law enforcement about suspected crime are a classic conditionally privileged occasion in this state. The authority is old and still the starting point: Bell v. Bank of Abbeville, 208 S.C. 490, 38 S.E.2d 641 (1946). A statement made on a conditionally privileged occasion is not actionable if the privilege is not abused. Where the occasion gives rise to the privilege, the law presumes the speaker acted without malice, and the burden sits on the person suing to show actual malice or that the speaker went beyond what the occasion allowed. That is the rule stated in Swinton Creek Nursery v. Edisto Farm Credit, ACA, 334 S.C. 469, 514 S.E.2d 126 (1999).

The elements of the privilege, from Fountain v. First Reliance Bank, 398 S.C. 434, 730 S.E.2d 305 (2012), are good faith, an interest to be upheld, a statement limited in scope to that purpose, a proper occasion, and publication in a proper manner to proper parties only. Run a routine noise complaint through those elements and you can see the problem for a plaintiff. The occasion is proper. The party is proper. The scope is narrow. That is why honest lawyers tell homeowners that most police-call defamation claims die at this gate.

But the gate has a key, and the key is malice. Malice defeats the privilege. In South Carolina common-law terms, actual malice means the speaker acted with ill will toward you, or acted recklessly or wantonly, with conscious indifference to your rights; going beyond what the occasion demands can also show abuse of the privilege. That is the holding line from Murray v. Holnam, Inc., 344 S.C. 129, 542 S.E.2d 743 (Ct. App. 2001). Now run a different record through the same elements: a caller who reports gunshots daily that no one else hears, who reports your toddler as a disturbance, whose calls spike each time you win a round in a fence fight, and who told another neighbor the calls would continue until you moved. Ill will is no longer an inference you are asking a court to stretch for. It is the pattern itself. That is why this post keeps saying the same thing in different sections: the defamation claim is only as good as the pattern-and-knowledge proof underneath it.

Two more honest limits. A claim for malicious prosecution needs an actual judicial proceeding that ended in your favor — charges filed and then resolved for you. A police visit, standing alone, is not that proceeding. And claims built on outrage alone face South Carolina's very high bar for intentional infliction of emotional distress, a separate analysis covered in the flagship post in this series. Neither limit means you have no case. Both mean the case is built from the record.

The steps that work, in the order that works

Step one: fix your own side of the street. Make sure the reports have nothing true to attach to. Keep noise inside your local ordinance hours, keep the dog in, keep cars off the grass if your covenants bar it. A caller who mixes one true complaint into nine false ones gains cover for all ten.

Step two: log everything and get the call history. Start the day you read this, and reconstruct the earlier calls from memory while the dates are still fresh, marking the reconstructed entries as written later.

Step three: one calm contact with the non-emergency line. Deliver the pattern summary once, in writing, with the history attached. Do not call dispatch to argue about individual calls. You are building a file with the agency, not fighting the caller through the agency.

Step four: put the neighbor on written notice. A short letter, kept civil, stating that the calls are being documented, that the call history shows a run of unfounded reports, and that knowingly false reports and complaints carry criminal penalties under S.C. Code §§ 16-17-722 and 16-17-725. Notice matters beyond its tone. Under the harassment definitions, some listed conduct counts when it is repeated after the victim gives written notice that the contact is unwanted, or after the victim files a law-enforcement incident report. Write the letter like it will be read aloud in a courtroom, because it may be.

Step five: use your HOA channel in writing. If you live in an association, send the board or manager a written complaint that cites the call history and asks the association to treat the pattern under the nuisance or offensive-conduct clause in your covenants. Written complaints create minutes, and minutes create a second independent record of the same pattern.

Step six: bring the file to a lawyer. With the log, the call history, the notice letter, and any HOA correspondence in hand, a lawyer can tell you which door the file fits: a criminal referral on the false-report statutes, a defamation claim built on malice, or a magistrate-court restraining order under the harassment article, which is the subject of a later post in this series. Without the file, that same meeting is a story. With it, the meeting is an evaluation.

Frequently asked questions

Why does my neighbor keep calling the police on me for no reason?

Usually one of three reasons: the neighbor believes a rule is being broken and wants an official record, the calls are leverage in another dispute such as a fence or parking fight, or the calls are the harassment itself, meant to put lights in your driveway at no cost to the caller. The call history, read as a whole, usually shows which one you are dealing with. Calls that track the dates of an unrelated dispute point to leverage or harassment.

Neighbor is calling the cops falsely on noise complaints what do we do

That is the exact title of a public thread on this problem, and the answer given there holds up under South Carolina law: document every call. Note the date, the time, what was claimed, and what the officer found. Request the call history for your address. If the noise claims are knowingly false — the house was quiet, the children were asleep, no gathering existed — the caller may be exposed under S.C. Code § 16-17-725 for a knowingly false complaint to an officer, or § 16-17-722 if a false report was filed. One mistaken call proves nothing. A documented run of them is a pattern.

My neighbor keeps calling police in order to harass me. Is there anything I can do?

Yes, and the order matters. Keep your own conduct clean, log each visit, obtain the call history, give the agency one written pattern summary through the non-emergency channel, and send the neighbor a short written notice that the calls are documented and that knowingly false reports carry penalties. After that, the file supports the stronger steps: a criminal referral, a defamation evaluation focused on malice, or a restraining-order petition in magistrate court.

Can I sue my neighbor for calling the police on me?

Sometimes, but not on the calls alone. Statements to law enforcement sit on a conditionally privileged occasion under Bell v. Bank of Abbeville, and good faith is presumed under Swinton Creek. To get past the privilege you must show actual malice — ill will, or reckless and wanton indifference to your rights, under Murray v. Holnam. A record showing the caller knew the reports were false, and kept filing them to drive you out, is what that showing is built from. Claims for malicious prosecution need actual charges that ended in your favor. Have a lawyer read the call history before anyone promises you an outcome.

How can I get the name of a person who keeps calling in false police reports?

Often you already know, because the calls track a known dispute. Where you do not, ask the responding agency what its records for your address show and what it can release; caller information in dispatch records may be limited, and agencies differ on what they disclose. Do not try to extract it by confrontation. The pattern usually answers the question on its own: the calls begin when a specific dispute begins.

When the calls stop being a neighborhood problem and become a legal one

Call a lawyer when any of these lines is crossed. The calls have produced a charge against you or a member of your household, even one later dropped. The call history shows a long run of unfounded reports tied to a dispute you can document. The caller has paired the calls with threats, trespass, or property damage. Or the HOA has started treating the caller's claims as a file on you, with violation letters arriving that trace back to the same source.

Traywick Law Offices, LLC represents homeowners across South Carolina in neighbor and HOA disputes, including the Charleston area. You can see the firm's Charleston practice areas or reach the office through the Charleston contact page. If you want a lawyer to read your call history and tell you plainly which remedy fits, request a legal opinion intake and bring the log with you.

Get a Free Consultation

This post is general legal information about South Carolina law. It is not legal advice about your specific situation, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Statutes and cases cited were checked against the research file for this series on October 28, 2026. Talk with a South Carolina lawyer about your own facts before you act.