Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a mistake by the Council which led to his mother being buried in the wrong plot. This is because an investigation by the Ombudsman would not achieve anything more for Mr X.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council buried his mother in the wrong plot.

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 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered Mr X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the information he provided. I also gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on a draft statement before reaching a final decision on his complaint.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X’s mother passed away and he contacted the Council about a burial plot next to other family members. The Council said a nearby plot was available. After his mother’s funeral, Mr X discovered the Council had buried his mother in a different plot - some distance away from the other family members.
5. Mr X complained to the Council. It said the mistake had occurred due to staff absence. It apologised and agreed to waive the fee of £2250 for the burial and the plot.
6. The role of the Ombudsman is to look for fault causing injustice. When we find this, we try to put the person affected back in the position they would have been were it not for the identified fault. We do not award compensation, but can recommend payments for injustice such as distress. Our guidance on remedies suggests an amount between £100 and £300 as a payment for distress. It says that “In cases where the distress was severe, up to £1000 may be justified.”
7. We do not investigate all the complaints we receive. In deciding whether to investigate, we need to consider what we can achieve for the person complaining.
8. I realise how distressing the events at the heart of Mr X’s complaint must have been. But the Council has explained how the mistake occurred, apologised, and has offered a payment of £2250. If we were to investigate, it is unlikely we would recommend a higher payment or any other remedy. An investigation by the Ombudsman is not therefore justified, because it is unlikely we could achieve anything more for Mr X.
9. Mr X is also unhappy with the way the Council has dealt with his complaints. But we will not normally investigate a council’s complaint handling if we are not going to investigate the substantive issue complained about. This applies here.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because an investigation by the Ombudsman would not achieve anything more for Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman