The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Councils response to complaints about fly-tipping. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
The complaint
Mr X complained about the Council’s refusal to place no fly-tipping signs on land opposite his home which he says has suffered from a number of fly-tipping incidents. He says the waste left is an inconvenience and he wants action to be taken to deter it form taking place.
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 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 continue 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), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered the information provided by the complainant and the Council’s response.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X says fly-tippers have dumped waste on land opposite his home on more than one occasion. Sometimes the waste has included dangerous items and children have tried to set the waste on fire. He asked the Council to provide signs to deter fly-tipping but it refused to do so.
Councils have a duty to remove waste left on public land and public expense but any waste deposited on private land has to be removed by the landowner at their own cost. Councils have powers to prosecute anyone proved to have carried out fly-tipping or to serve fixed penalty notices. There is no duty to carry out preventive action against fly-tipping, which is a criminal offence. The Council told Mr X that it would not provide signs at this location as it was not appropriate.
The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
Providing signs on public land is a matter for the Council’s discretion and there is no fault in its decision to reject Mr X’s suggestion.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint about the Councils response to complaints about fly-tipping. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman