The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s new wheeled recycling bins. There is not enough evidence of Council fault in its decision that Mr X’s property is suitable for the new bins to justify investigating. Any fault in the Council’s initial response to Mr X’s concerns did not cause sufficient injustice to him to warrant investigation.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council: introduced new wheeled recycling bins, to replace the recycling boxes, which he considers are unsuitable for his property; delayed in contacting him on his concerns about the new bins.
Mr X is dealing with his recyclable waste in different, less convenient ways, without using the new bins. He wants the Council to empty his recycling boxes.
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 any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained; or any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6)) We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision-making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information from Mr X, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The core Council action which gave rise to Mr X’s complaint is its introduction of new wheeled recycling waste bins to replace the previous box scheme. Mr X considers his property does not have space to store the new bins and is dealing with his recyclable waste so as not to use the Council’s bins.
After initially considering the matter without visiting, the Council’s officer assessed Mr X’s property from the street. They determined there was space at the property to store the required bins. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in its decision-making here to warrant investigation. Officers assessed Mr X’s property to reach their view that he would be able to use the new wheeled bins system for his recycling. I realise Mr X disagrees. But it is not fault for a council to properly make a decision with which someone disagrees.
There may have been fault here by the Council in the way it initially responded to Mr X’s complaint. He says an officer sent an email about the matter to the wrong email address. I recognise that delayed the outcome of his complaint for a few weeks and may have caused him some annoyance. But that is not a sufficient personal injustice to him to warrant us using our resources, obtained from public funds, on an investigation.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because: there is not enough evidence of Council fault in its decision that Mr X’s property is suitable for the wheeled recycling bins to justify investigating; and any fault in the Council’s initial response to Mr X did not cause sufficient injustice to him to warrant investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman