The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about allotment fees because part of the complaint is late and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains about an increase in allotment fees and that the Council did not tell him he does not qualify for the concessionary rate.
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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6)) We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence and information from Mr X’s home borough. I considered our Assessment Code and comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.
My assessment
The Council does not offer concessionary rates for allotment holders who live in other council areas, and it charges a higher rate for non-residents. Mr X’s own council charges a higher fee for non-residents and does not offer concessions to non-residents.
In May 2020 Mr X signed a tenancy for an allotment. He rents the plot from a council different to the area he lives in. Mr X currently pays £43 a year. Mr X says that when he signed the tenancy the Council did not tell him he would not qualify for a concession. He also says it did not tell him the fees would increase. Mr X says he had enquired, in May, about concessionary rates but did not get a reply.
The Council sent Mr X a bill for the plot in October 2020. The bill said he was not receiving a concession. Mr X paid the bill. There is no indication he complained about not getting a concession.
In October 2019 the Council had held a seminar which included a proposal to change the fee structure. The Council continued to explore this and in February 2021 told all plot holders of the proposed changes and asked for feedback. Mr X objected to the increase in fees for non-residents. He says he did not get a response. The Council says this was because he emailed an officer who had left.
As part of the fee review the Council carried out a consultation, compared its fees to other boroughs, and considered equalities. It then decided to change the fee structure. For Mr X his fee this year will increase to £90.
Mr X complained. He said he cannot afford the increase and asked for the concessionary rate. The Council explained why it had decided to increase the fees and confirmed the concessionary rates are for its own residents who contribute to the service through council tax. The Council confirmed Mr X does not qualify for a concession.
Mr X says the Council did not tell him in 2020 that he would not get a concession and the Council agrees this is the case. But, this information was included in the invoice in October 2020, and on all subsequent invoices. In addition, Mr X says he had enquired in May 2020 about concessions and did not get a reply. He could have pursued this further before signing the tenancy as he was aware it could be an issue. And, there is nothing to suggest Mr X was unhappy with the fees until he became aware of the proposal to increase them. I will not investigate this part of the complaint because Mr X did not complain to us until 2022 and I have not seen any good reason why Mr X could not have complained in 2020.
I will not investigate the increase in fees or that Mr X does not qualify for the concessionary rate or the residents’ rate. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council is entitled to increase the fees and has explained the reasons for the increase. Its policy, in line with other councils, is to charge higher fees to non-residents and to restrict concessionary fees to residents. The Council’s decision reflects the policy so there is no reason to start an investigation. We are not an appeal body and we cannot intervene simply because a council makes a decision that someone disagrees with.
Mr X says the Council did not tell him of the proposed increase when he signed the tenancy. But, as that stage, no decisions had been made and it was still at a planning and consultation stage. This does not represent fault requiring an investigation and it is impossible to know if Mr X would have refused the plot had he known the fees were under review.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because part of the complaint is late and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman