Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (20 000 723)

Category : Environment and regulation > Cemeteries and crematoria

Decision : Upheld

Decision date : 22 Jul 2020

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the compensation the Council offered after it prepared the wrong plot for a burial. This is because the Council has offered a fair and proportionate remedy.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says the Council’s offer of £250, after it prepared the wrong plot for a burial, is inadequate. Mr X wants a full or 75% refund of his costs of £6000.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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 an investigation if the Council has already provided a fair remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I read the complaint and the Council’s response. I considered the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies. I invited Mr X to comment on this draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

  1. Mr X arranged a funeral for his mother. He initially agreed a plot near to the graves of other family members (plot one). The Council then identified a plot adjacent to the grave of a family member (plot two). Mr X accepted plot two.
  2. When Mr X arrived for the burial the Council explained it had wrongly prepared plot one. It gave Mr X the option of using plot one or waiting for plot two to be prepared. Mr X decided to wait for plot two. The Council took about an hour to prepare plot two and Mr X’s mother was buried in plot two. Mr X says the experience was very distressing and upsetting.
  3. Mr X complained to the Council. In response the Council apologised and explained what had gone wrong. It had tried to help by finding a plot nearer to other family members but, in so doing, the correct processes were not followed and the Council prepared the wrong plot. The Council offered £250 for Mr X’s distress.
  4. Mr X says £250 is inadequate. He thinks the Council should refund all, or 75%, of the £6000 costs.


  1. I will not start an investigation because the Council has offered a fair remedy. It explained what went wrong, the reason for the change of plot, apologised and offered £250. This is a proportionate response and one that is consistent with the Ombudsman’s guidance. Mr X was caused distress on what was already a difficult and upsetting day. But, he was given the option of proceeding with plot one if he did not want to wait, he has not suffered a financial loss, and the mistake was rectified as quickly as possible. Mr X would like between £4500 to £6000 but this is much higher that the Ombudsman would ask a council to pay in recognition of distress.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. I will not start an investigation because the Council has offered a fair remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

Privacy settings

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.