Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s acceptance that his family grave plot belongs to a different family member. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complains that the Council accepts his family grave plot was assigned to another family member when he believes it was not. He wants to claim ownership of the plot and to be allowed to have his own ashes interred there at the time of his death.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

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

3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered all the information which Mr X submitted with his complaint. I have also considered the Council’s response and Mr X has commented on the draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X says the Council allowed the family grave plot to be inherited by a family member on the death of his brother. He says this member is not a blood-relative and that he is concerned that he will not be able to have his remains interred with his parents at the time of his death. He wants the Council to accept that the grave should remain in the ownership of his parent’s direct descendants.
6. The Council says it has a legal document which confirms the grave plot was in his brother’s ownership and that he assigned joint ownership to another party during his lifetime. On his death, the plot was retained by the surviving owner. The Council cannot disclose the name or details of the owner due to data protection restrictions.
7. The Council contacted the owner on Mr X’s behalf and asked if they would be willing to allow him to have his remains interred in the plot. The owner told the Council that they were willing to share ownership of the plot subject to sharing the maintenance costs. Mr X remains convinced that the plot is not legally the property of the current owner.
8. The Ombudsman cannot investigate complaints about legal agreements between the members of a family. If Mr X doubts the validity of the claim to ownership of the plot, he would have to challenge it in the courts. There is no reason for the Council to doubt the validity of the ownership unless Mr X can provide legal proof that it is invalid.

Back to top

Final decision

9. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman