The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the purchase of a burial plot. This is because it is unlikely investigation would add anything significant to the responses the Council has already made to the complaint, or reach different conclusions.
The complaint
The complainant, who I will refer to as Mrs B, complains that the Council misled her during the process of buying a burial plot for a family member.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mrs B’s complaint relates to the purchase of a burial plot for a family member. She says that, when she purchased the plot, it was next to a hedge and the Council’s officer assured her there would be no further burials to the right of the plot.
Mrs B says she was misled, as the hedge was subsequently cut back and the space created has been used for the interment of cremated remains. Mrs B has provided photographic evidence to demonstrate the situation before and after the hedge was cut.
Mrs B says the matter has caused her family emotional distress. She believes she was misled while buying the plot and believes the cost should be refunded. In addition, she has asked the Council to sell her family the adjacent plot on the left at a discounted rate, make a payment in recognition of the distress the family has suffered, and apologise.
In response, the Council has said it cannot say whether Mrs B was misled. But, in recognition of the distress caused it has apologised, offered to extend the lease on the plot and make a payment to Mrs B equivalent to the cost of the interment. Mrs B does not believe the apology is genuine and does not regard the proposed settlement as appropriate.
The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because it is unlikely we could add anything significant to the responses the Council has already made. Without a definitive record of the relevant discussion, it would not be possible to come to a safe finding that Mrs B was misled. That being the case, there is no prospect that investigation by the Ombudsman would reach a different conclusion. Our intervention is not therefore warranted.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint because it is unlikely investigation would add anything significant to the responses the Council has already made, or reach different conclusions.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman