Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about funeral arrangements. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in the substantive issues complained about. Although there is fault in the complaint handling, we would not consider the injustice caused is significant enough to justify our resource to investigate.

The complaint

1. Mr B says he contacted the Council after a relative, Ms C, died to ask about funeral arrangements because the Council was arranging it. Ms C had lived with another relative, Ms D, and Mr B says the Council will not allow him access to Ms D. Mr B says he could not get items such as photographs for the funeral service. After the funeral Mr B contacted the Council about the return of Ms C’s ashes. Mr B says there was delay and a lack of compassion from the Council in response to his correspondence throughout. Mr B says the Council insisted he must complain using its specific complaint form. Mr B says the Council has caused emotional distress, and unnecessary time and trouble, at a difficult period.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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
• any fault has not caused significant enough injustice to the person who complained to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council was responsible for arranging Ms C’s funeral and did so with liaison with Ms D who was the next of kin. Mr B says the Council is restricting his contact with Ms D because it will not give him the key code for her property. The Council rightly says it cannot share that information without Ms D’s consent. Mr B can contact Ms D by telephone and can arrange to visit when care workers are there to let him in. If Ms D wishes for Mr B to have a key or the key code she can ask for this to be arranged.
6. The Council arranged the return of Ms C’s ashes to Ms D, and this did occur, but the Council did not confirm this to Mr B.
7. There is not enough evidence of fault in the substantive issues complained of to justify investigation.
8. We do not investigate all complaints we receive. In deciding whether to investigate we need to consider various tests. These include the alleged injustice to the person complaining. We only investigate the most serious complaints.
9. Mr B’s upset at his relative’s death was compounded by delays and a lack of empathy from the Council when responding to his correspondence about these issues.
10. Although Mr B is unhappy with the way the Council dealt with his complaint. It is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We would not consider the complaint handling has caused a significant enough injustice to justify our involvement. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the substantive issues complained about. Although there is fault in the complaint handling, we would not consider the injustice caused is significant enough to justify our resource to investigate.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman