Summary: Miss X complains the Council has allowed a new larger memorial stone on the cremation plot next to her late father’s plot. She says it is too close and violates her father’s plot. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint as we have not seen any evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council allowed a new larger memorial stone on the plot next to that of her late father. She says the Council did not ask her permission. And the new memorial feels as if it is on top of her father’s plot and that it is a violation.
2. She also complains about the way the Council handled her complaint.

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information provided by Miss X and the Council. Miss X commented on the draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Miss X contacted the Council to discuss the new larger memorial stone on the plot next to her father’s cremation plot.
6. The assistant director for the service responded. He advised the new memorial was compliant with Council regulations. Miss X did not agree with the response and made a formal complaint.
7. The same assistant director responded to Miss X. He advised he:
• had examined the relevant records for her fathers and the neighbouring plots
• had interviewed staff involved
• visited, interviewed and obtained documentary evidence from the monumental mason who completed the work

He confirmed the memorial stone complied with the Council’s regulations.

8. Miss X remained dissatisfied. The Council’s executive director reviewed the complaint. He also confirmed he visited her father’s plot. He again confirmed the memorial complied with the Council’s regulations.

Assessment

9. The Council has confirmed the memorial stone complies with its regulations. I have read a copy of the regulations and the measurements provided by the Council do conform with those stated in the regulations.
10. I understand Miss X disagrees with the regulations and wants them changed. However, the Ombudsman’s role is primarily to look at the way the Council carries out its administrative functions. Not to look at its policy decisions which are a matter for the electorate rather than the Ombudsman. Our focus lies on the way it makes its decisions and, without fault in its processes, we cannot question the merits of its decisions.
11. From the information supplied it seems the Council has considered Miss X’s concerns and I see no sign of procedural irregularity which would allow us to question its decisions.
12. Miss X also questions the independence of the complaints procedure. The complaints process states the service responsible will try to resolve complaints first. Then, if needed, it is escalated to the relevant head of service and finally reviewed by the appropriate assistant director.
13. In this case the service manager initially responded to Mrs X’s concerns. As he is the manager he also responded to her formal complaint. It was reviewed by the appropriate assistant director. I understand why Miss X questions this process, but it is clear the Council followed its published complaints procedure. I have not seen any evidence of fault.

Back to top

Final decision

14. I will not investigate this complaint. This is because we have not seen any evidence of fault in the Council allowing the larger memorial stone to be erected on the neighbouring cremation plot. Nor have I seen any evidence of fault in the way the Council responded to Miss X’s complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman