Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about problems in a cemetery because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. In addition, the Council has provided a proportionate remedy regarding a delay in providing a bench.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, complains about poor drainage in a cemetery. She also complains about a delay in getting a bench and that another family was allowed to reserve a plot while the Council refused Ms X’s request.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• the Council has provided a fair response.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence and photographs Ms X sent to the Council. I considered comments Ms X made in response to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Ms X complained to the Council of poor planning and maintenance causing swamp like conditions in a cemetery. She also complained of a delay in getting a memorial bench and that the Council had allowed another family to reserve a plot while refusing Ms X’s request.
5. The Council explained that high rainfall had caused water to collect on the site and, an increase in burials caused by the pandemic, had made the problem worse. The Council sought advice from a consultant who confirmed there were no underlying drainage problems but it was the consequence of excess rain. The Council explained it had carried out work to improve the drainage and was finalising plans for further work. The Council explained the steps it took to maintain access and that it followed health and safety rules.
6. The Council apologised for a delay in providing the bench and explained why the delay had occurred. As a remedy it waived the £500 cost of providing additional letters on the plaque. Ms X declined the offer and instead used an inscription which was included in the price of the bench.
7. The Council denied giving preferential treatment to other people regarding plots. It explained it does not currently allow people to reserve plots due to a lack of space. It also explained why it appeared the other family obtained a bench more quickly than Ms X.
8. I will not investigate this complaint for the following reasons. The Council has provided a proportionate response regarding the bench. It has apologised, explained what went wrong and offered to waive the cost of a longer inscription. Ms X declined the offer but, as she had originally wanted a longer inscription, this was a fair remedy.
9. I will not investigate the complaint about the drainage because there is insufficient evidence of fault. I appreciate the appearance of the cemetery may have been distressing and the repairs disruptive. However, the Council obtained advice that the problems were caused by excess rain and it then took appropriate action to improve the drainage. Ms X continues not to accept the Council’s explanation and says inadequate precautions were taken during the work but there is not enough evidence of fault to require an investigation.
10. The Council has provided me with information about why Ms X thinks another family received preferential treatment. Due to data protection rules I cannot share this information with Ms X. Ms X wants us to investigate to confirm whether the Council has been truthful in its explanation. However, I see no suggestion of fault by the Council in relation to this issue and there is no reason to doubt the accuracy of its response.

Back to top

Final decision

11. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because it has a provided a fair response regarding the bench.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman