Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Council error concerning the purchase of burial plots in 2011. This is because the Council has provided a fair remedy.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says the compensation offered by the Council for not processing the purchase of burial plots correctly is inadequate.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I read the complaint and the Council’s responses. I considered the rules relating to the sale of burial plots. I invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Council’s cemetery regulations

4. People can buy the exclusive right of burial in a grave space. The Council issues a Grant of Exclusive Right of Burial (a document) to the purchaser which details the location of the grave.
5. The grave owner can sell back the grave rights. The Council will refund the amount that was paid.

What happened

6. In 2011 Mr X bought three rights of burial. In June 2020 he contacted the Council to say he wanted to sell them back. Due to the time that had passed the Council had to check the paper files. In July it told Mr X it could not find any record of the sale and it asked if Mr X had any evidence. Mr X found receipts for two of the graves showing a combined payment of £638.
7. In August the Council accepted that although Mr X had provided receipts it had no record of the sale and it had not issued a Grant of Exclusive Burial. The Council agreed it had made an error in 2011 and, even though it only had evidence of two purchases, it agreed to make a refund of £955 which is the amount Mr X paid in 2011 for three plots.
8. Mr X was dissatisfied and wanted a refund to represent the current cost of the plots. The current value of each plot is £710. The Council paid £2130 to Mr X. This represents the refund value from 2011 plus £1179 for Mr X’s time, distress and inconvenience. The compensation was paid in October.
9. The Council apologised for some delays that had occurred while it considered the complaint. It also apologised for the failing in 2011 and for the distress caused when it told Mr X that the graves had already been sold to someone else.
10. Mr X is dissatisfied with the compensation. He says there were long delays by the Council and the level of compensation is not an adequate reflection of what he has suffered.

Assessment

11. I will not start an investigation because the Council has provided a fair remedy. It accepts it failed to process the purchase correctly in 2011 and, in line with the regulations, has made a refund for the amount paid. It has apologised and paid an additional sum of £1179 for Mr X’s distress and inconvenience. This is more than the amount recommended in our guidance as a remedy for distress. Mr X asked to sell the plots on 23 June and received the money in mid-October. Given that the Council had to check historic records and gather more information from Mr X and other family members, I do not agree the time taken represents an undue delay or one that needs a further remedy.

Back to top

Final decision

12. I will not start an investigation because the Council has provided a fair remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman