LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other

London Borough of Hillingdon

21-018-853 · Environment And Regulation › Refuse And Recycling · Decision date: 20 April 2022 · View Hillingdon Council scorecard

Full Decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a charge to deposit commercial waste. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and nothing we could add to the Council’s response.

The complaint

The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains he has been overcharged after he disposed of commercial waste in March 2021. Mr X thinks the Council made a mistake because the disputed invoice is for the same amount as an outstanding invoice.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence and the invoices. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

My assessment

The Council issued Mr X with an invoice in January 2021 for £175 for waste he disposed of in December.

Mr X disposed of two loads of waste in March. The Council issued an invoice in April for £213. Mr X paid £37 leaving a balance of £175.

Mr X complained the Council had over charged him in April and said the waste did not weigh 840kg as stated by the Council. Mr X says his loads always weigh considerably less.

The Council explained that he queried the charge on the day and was invited to reload the van. The Council assesses the weight on a weighbridge. Mr X declined the offer to reload. The CCTV was checked and there were no other items or people on the weighbridge. The Council found no evidence it had overcharged Mr X. The Council noted Mr X had commented that some of the bags were very heavy. The Council said it could not decide the charge was wrong simply because the van was heavier than on previous visits.

I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because we could not add to the Council’s response. The invoices were not the same but were issued for different amounts. So, there is nothing to suggest there was an error with the invoicing. In addition, there is no evidence the Council has overcharged Mr X and it would be impossible for us to find out the weight of the waste.

Final decision

We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because we could not add to the Council’s response.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman