Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of matters relating to Ms X’s crematorium family memorial as it is unlikely we will find fault by the Council or that we could change the outcome of the complaint.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the memorial at a crematorium, where several family members’ ashes are scattered, is now being used by another family. This has caused Ms X much distress.

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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

Background

5. Since the late 1990s, Ms X’s family had a memorial at a crematorium, where her family’s ashes were scattered. After Ms X’s mother passed away, the Council says, in 2014, it transferred the memorial lease into Ms X’s name.
6. The Council wrote to Ms X in September 2021 to say the memorial lease was due to end the following month. The Council asked Ms X what she wanted to do. Ms X says she did not know at that time that she was the owner of the lease and complains that she had never been informed of this by the Council.
7. Ms X says, after receiving the letter, she telephoned the Council and in that telephone call, she asked for the commemorative plaque to be returned to her. Ms X says she gave no instruction, however, regarding the lease. Ms X says that she was going through a stressful time, when this was taking place.
8. Ms X visited the crematorium in mid-2022 and says she was very upset to see a new plaque at the memorial, relating to a different family. Ms X remains unhappy about the Council’s handling of this matter, and feels she was not properly informed about being the owner of the lease or what would happen if she did not renew it.
9. In its complaint responses to Ms X, the Council says it has no recording of the telephone call Ms X had with it, but that its notes of the call taken at the time, say that Ms X wanted to terminate the plaque and would collect it. The Council also referred to the letter it had sent Ms X in September 2021, pointing out that this had explained what would happen if the agreement was terminated ie that the memorial would become available for re-dedication by another family.

Back to top

My assessment

10. As there is no recording of the call in question, we are unable to determine what exactly was said by Ms X or the Council. However, the Council’s contemporaneous records suggest that what Ms X did say in the phone call indicated to it that she wanted to terminate the agreement. Given this, and as the Council had written to Ms X previously, to explain what would happen if the agreement was not renewed, I consider there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to justify our involvement. I appreciate what Ms X says about how she was feeling at the time, but I do not consider this equates to the Council having been at fault.
11. I recognise that Ms X remains unhappy as she says she was never properly informed that she was made the owner of the lease, after the death of her mother. However, I do not consider we should investigate what took place historically, as this would not change the outcome of the complaint or provide any meaningful outcome for Ms X, in my view.
12. For these reasons, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because it is unlikely we will find faut by the Council or add to what it has already said.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman