Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s cleaning and decluttering of Mr Y’s property. This is because the Council has already taken, or offered to take, suitable action to remedy the issues raised. There is nothing further we would add or recommend were we to also investigate and so it does not warrant a further investigation by this office.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains on behalf of his father, Mr Y, about the Council’s deep clean and decluttering of his property. Mr X says the Council used only household cleaning supplies, including Mr Y’s supplies; decluttered with little or no consultation about what to keep, removing essential goods such as toiletries; did the clean in four half-days rather than four full days and left many areas not cleaned even after the cleaners attended a second time.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. We do not start an investigation if we decide:

• we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take;
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6) & (7) as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complained to the Council about its decluttering and cleaning of Mr Y’s property.
7. The Council investigated. It sent supervisors to inspect Mr Y’s property. It found the clean had been completed to an acceptable standard, but there were some minor areas where cleaning had been missed. It offered to rectify these straight away but this offer was declined. It also explained that cleaning the ceiling was not part of the service it provided. It acknowledged the cleaning team had used Mr Y’s washing up liquid when cleaning and had thrown away some toiletry items from the bathroom.
8. The Council partially upheld Mr X’s complaint and, to remedy the issues raised, the Council applied a £200 reduction to Mr Y’s bill.
9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because the Council has already taken or offered to take, suitable action to resolve the issues raised in the complaint via its own investigation of the matter. Whilst the offer was declined, the Council offered to take further remedial action to address the outstanding issues with the cleaning of the property and applied a £200 reduction to the charges to remedy the issues raised. These actions provided a suitable remedy in response to the issues raised in the complaint. As such, there is nothing further we would add or recommend were we to also investigate and so it does not warrant a further investigation by this office and the use of limited public funds to do so.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council has already offered a suitable remedy for the issues raised and there is nothing further we would add or recommend were we to also investigate.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman