The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damages to property allegedly caused by the refuse collection service. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome as we cannot decide who is liable for any damage.
The complaint
Ms B says the Council refuses to pay for damage to property she says its refuse collection staff caused. Ms B says the Council will not visit the site to consider any actions either party could take to prevent future damage. Ms B says the refuse collection staff do not report any damages, and often leave the bin store unlocked which is a security risk. Ms B says the Council often does not collect the bins as scheduled, so bins overflow and are a health and safety issue.
Ms B says the issues could be easily resolved if the refuse collection staff took more care when removing the bins, this would prevent future problems. Ms B wants the Council to pay for the damages.
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: further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Ms B manages a block of apartments that uses a communal bin store. The Council visit weekly to collect rubbish and recycling, with three collection rounds due on the same day. The refuse collection crews have keys to access the bin store.
Ms B and the Council are in dispute about who is responsible for damage to the bin store. The Council has decided the damage is caused by wear and tear rather than accidental damage, and so its insurer will not cover the damage. This is not a dispute the Ombudsman can resolve. It is for insurers or a court to decide liability for damage.
Any actions the Ombudsman might recommend, such as the Council visiting the site and discussing ways forward with Ms B, will not achieve the aim of deciding who is responsible to take what action to prevent any damage occurring, and if damage occurs who is responsible to fix it. It would also not guarantee the prevention of any future damage, either through wear and tear or accidental damage.
The Council says it has no reports of missed collections from Ms B since January. The Council says it expects staff to lock the bin store after them if they unlocked it, but if it was already unlocked, they would leave it as they found it. The Council says it is not responsible for the security of the building, only for the collection of waste. The Ombudsman would not be able to find out who has left the doors unlocked
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. We cannot achieve the outcome Ms B wants as we cannot decide liability for damages.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman