The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to increase the charges for memorials. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Councils decision. Further, it is unlikely we could add anything to the Council’s response, or achieve anything more for Mr X.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council has unreasonably increased the price of memorials at the cemetery and has not explained its reasons. He says he will have to pay nearly double what he paid ten years ago.
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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X leased a memorial spot in the cemetery for a period of 10 years. When he came to renew the lease, he was informed the price had increased. Mr X does not consider the price rise acceptable as it is greater than the inflation rises over the same period. He says he will have to pay nearly double what he paid ten years ago. He says the Council has not properly explained the reasoning for the level of price increase.
Councils are entitled to consider the prices of services and increase them where they see fit. There is no fault in the Council increasing the charges for memorials. I appreciate Mr X disagrees with the new price because it rose by more than inflation. However, the Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body and cannot intervene simply because a council makes a decision that someone disagrees with.
Mr X says he wants the Council to provide him with a clear breakdown and justification for the price increase. The Council informed Mr X in its response that the running costs of the cemetery had increased and therefore service prices needed to increase. Mr X is not satisfied with that response. It is not our role to seek more detailed answers to a complainant’s questions in the absence of evidence of fault by the Council. Nor can we presume that any more detailed explanation would necessarily satisfy Mr X either.
The Council offered Mr X an alternative to his current memorial and offered a free lease for one year whilst he decides how he wants to proceed. It is unlikely we would achieve anything significantly different by investigating these concerns further, in the absence of evidence the Council is at fault. We therefore do not fault the offer the Council has made to provide a year’s free lease.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault and it is unlikely we could achieve anything more for Mr X.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman