Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the circumstances surrounding the burial of the complainant’s mother. This is because the Council has provided an appropriate response for some errors that occurred and because there is insufficient evidence of fault for the other issues.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains about events surrounding the burial of his mother. He complains the Council did not use the agreed site for the burial, there has been a lack of care for the grave, and the Council has refused to release CCTV. Mr X wants an apology and a full refund.

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 and proportionate remedy.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence and Order for Interment. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mr X purchased the right of burial for a lawn grave. After the soil has settled and compacted, a period of about 12 months, lawn is reinstated over the grave. I have seen the Order for Interment, signed by Mr X, which requests burial in section five.
5. Mr X complained to the Council that it had been agreed his mother would be buried in section A. He provided a map which he said supported this. He also complained that, after the burial, the flowers were disturbed and the grave had been used as an access for digging other graves. Mr X referred to the area where his mother is buried as being a building site.
6. The Councill confirmed it had buried his mother in section five as requested on the Order for Interment. It agreed that on the map Mr X provided the A had been changed to a five but it did not know who had made this change. The Council agreed the grave does not currently look at its best but said this is normal during the period of settling until the area can be turfed. To improve the appearance temporarily it offered to lay some bark or turf; Mr X declined as he did not think it was sufficient. The Council said it did not recognise his comments about his mother being buried on a building site.
7. The Council apologised for mud being left on the flowers while digging another grave. The Council said that was unacceptable. It explained it had to move some items to dig another grave and said this is provided for in the terms for exclusive burial. The Council told Mr X it could not give him any CCTV because the cameras have not worked for many years.
8. The Council accepted there had been a breakdown in communication and offered to waive a fee of £307 when Mr X applies for a headstone. Mr X rejects this as he says no further fees are payable as he has paid for the plot. However, there are additional fees if someone decides to place a headstone on the grave.
9. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault. The Order for Interment asked for a grave in section five. Mr X’s mother has been buried in section five so there is insufficient evidence to suggest the Council provided a grave in the wrong location. In addition, section A is full and Mr X’s mother could not be buried there. Mr X wants to pursue the issue of the map and says he did not change it. However, regardless of what happened with the map, it remains that his mother has been buried in the requested location and section A is full.
10. The Council explained why the grave currently looks visually unappealing but said that is normal for a lawn grave and the appearance will improve once turf is laid. The area is also not a test area, as Mr X alleges, but the Council trialled a temporary surface in one location to see if it would reduce wet and muddy conditions during winter.
11. The Council explained there is no CCTV it can provide. Mr X does not accept this but he could pursue that by making a Freedom of Information request.
12. There was some fault regarding the Council ensuring proper care was taken while digging other graves. But, it has apologised and offered temporary measures to improve the appearance of the grave until it is fully turfed. It also offered to waive the permit fee. The combination of the explanations, apology, and fee waiver is a fair and proportionate remedy and an investigation is not required.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because the Council has provided a fair remedy for the errors that did occur.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman