The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to removing fly-tipping and graffiti in Mr X’s area. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
The complaint
Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to prevent graffiti and fly-tipping in his area and its response to removing it within reasonable time. he has suggested that the Council install CCTV on six sites in his area but it has not done so.
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 we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, 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 says there is a problem with fly-tipping and graffiti in his area and he believes the Council should do more to prevent it. He has suggested that it instals CCTV cameras on six streets in his area in an attempt to prevent the frequent incidents.
The Council says that it can only respond to reports of criminal activity on the streets when the public or its officers report new incidents. It told Mr X that it is carrying out a review which will be concluded next year into the management of dumped waste and it will consider CCTV installations if the activity meets the threshold for this.
Councils have powers to prosecute persons for fly-tipping and graffiti is a crime under the Criminal Damage Act 1971 which is enforced by the Police. The Council has explained to Mr X that it is difficult to catch persons responsible for the crimes as they must be witnessed and identified. CCTV has only a limited role in enabling prosecution to succeed.
The Council can only take action to remove graffiti as it is a criminal matter. The Council has taken some action but the graffiti often is quickly replaced by more and the owners of private buildings are responsible for removing it themselves. It is unlikely that any council could prevent these crimes from taking place and imposing costs on the local residents for the removal of the activity.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to removing fly-tipping and graffiti in Mr X’s area. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman