Summary: There was no fault by the Council in its decision to suspend part of its pest control service during the COVID-19 pandemic. This was a decision it was entitled to take, and we have no grounds to question it. The Council’s handling of the complainant’s complaint was poor, but this did not cause a significant injustice. We have therefore completed our investigation.

The complaint

1. I will refer to the complainant as Miss N.
2. Miss N complains the Council suspended its cockroach pest control service, meaning she had to pay a higher price for a private treatment for her home. Miss N says she wants the Council to reimburse her the difference between the cost of its service and what she paid, and also to investigate a neighbouring property for cockroaches and rats.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
5. This complaint involves events that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Government introduced a range of new and frequently updated rules and guidance during this time. We can consider whether the Council followed the relevant legislation, guidance and our published “Good Administrative Practice during the response to COVID-19”.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I reviewed Miss N’s correspondence with the Council.
7. I also shared a draft copy of this decision with each party for their comments.

Back to top

What I found

8. In early 2021 Miss N says she began experiencing a cockroach infestation at her house. After enquiring with the Council, it informed her it was currently only offering its free rat treatment service, with its other (paid for) services being suspended.
9. Miss N says she then paid £238.80 for a private treatment, which is considerably more than the Council’s normal cockroach treatment fee of £78.
10. Miss N complained to the Council through her MP about the suspension of its service. She said she expected to be reimbursed for the difference between the Council’s fee and the private fee. She also said she had been told by a third party there was an infestation of cockroaches and “lots of rat holes” in the neighbouring property, which Miss N said the Council should investigate.
11. In response to her complaint, the Council explained it had suspended its cockroach treatment service because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Miss N then complained to the Ombudsman on 18 August.

Legislative background

12. Councils have specific legal powers under the Prevention of Damage by Pests Act 1949, to take any steps deemed necessary to ensure that owners and occupiers of land keep their land free from large numbers of rats and mice. Councils may serve a notice under section 4 of the Act, setting out the steps they require and the time limit for action. They can require a treatment by a professional pest controller, removal of rubbish, or structural works.

Analysis

13. The Ombudsman’s role is to review how councils have made decisions. We may criticise a council if, for example, it has not followed the appropriate procedure, failed to take account of relevant evidence, or not properly explained why it has made a decision. But we do not make operational or policy decisions on councils’ behalf, and we cannot uphold a complaint simply because someone disagrees with a decision a council has made.
14. The Council has a legal duty to investigate and take steps to address significant mouse and rat infestations. But it has no duty to offer a cockroach treatment service, paid for or otherwise. That the Council normally does offer this service is something it may choose to do; it is not a requirement in law, and the Council is entitled to suspend or withdraw the service entirely if it considers it appropriate to do so.
15. I acknowledge Miss N’s distress she had to pay considerably more for a private cockroach treatment, than she would if the Council’s service had been available. But, while it is unfortunate the suspension coincided with the infestation at Miss N’s home, this does not mean the Council was at fault. It follows, therefore, I cannot say Miss N’s additional costs are an injustice arising from a flawed Council decision.
16. I am critical of the Council’s handling of Miss N’s complaint. In its first substantive response, it explained why it had suspended the cockroach service, but did not address Miss N’s comments about the neighbouring property and what she had been advised by the third party. And in its second response, it simply explained she could ask the Council for a cockroach treatment at a cost of £78; I assume this meant the Council had reinstated the service by then, but Miss N had already sought private treatment by that point.
17. I am satisfied this poor complaint handling amounts to fault. However, I am not persuaded this caused a significant injustice to Miss N. As I have explained, I do not consider there are grounds for the Council to reimburse her additional costs, and so I would not expect the Council to have offered this in response to her complaint. And the Council has no general legal duty to investigate possible cockroach infestations, and so there is no reason for Miss N’s report of cockroaches next door to have triggered any action.
18. The Council does have a general duty to investigate possible rat infestations. However, I consider Miss N’s report of rats to be speculative. There is no suggestion she has seen any direct evidence of rats, either in her own property or the neighbouring one, and I would not criticise the Council for not acting on this report alone.
19. Therefore, while the Council’s handling of Miss N’s complaint was poor, I do not consider anything significant has been lost by this.

Back to top

Final decision

20. I have completed my investigation with a finding of fault which did not cause injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman