Summary: Mr X complains the Council disproportionately levelled over 1300 grave memorials without sufficient risk assessment and notice to relatives, causing distress. On the evidence provided we do not find fault with the Council, as it followed its policies and procedures.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council disproportionately levelled over 1300 grave memorials without sufficient risk assessment and notice to relatives.
2. Mr X would like the Council to restore his Grandparents’ graves.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I spoke with Mr X and considered the information he provided.
6. I made enquiries with the Council and considered the information it provided.
7. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

8. Mr X visited his Grandparents’ graves in October 2023. When he next went in December the headstones had been flattened.
9. Mr X complained to the Council in January 2024 asking why it had levelled over 1000 headstones. He said his Grandparents’ graves were in fine condition when he visited in October. He complained the Council had not made any adequate attempt to contact the families, and it should have considered alternative methods rather than immediately taking the memorials down.
10. The Council’s response in January 2024 said it had run several public awareness campaigns before it began the testing programme. The Council says it had considered alternatives available but chose to lay the headstones flat so as not to impact other graves. The Council said it wrote to the owners of the graves using records on file.
11. The Council’s records show that Mr X’s Grandparents graves were owned by a deceased Grandparent, and the Council did not have a record of other family members. The Council said it was reliant on the signage on the memorial to let family members know.
12. Mr X was unhappy with the Council’s response so he brought his complaint to the Ombudsman.
13. In response to our enquiries the Council said the testing was carried out by a fully trained in-house team. The graves were visually assessed first and then tested by hand, the purpose being to represent what may happen if someone were to pull themselves up or unintentionally walk into a memorial. There had been several serious incidents documented in other cemeteries of memorials two and a half feet or smaller falling on visitors.
14. Before the inspections the Council ran adverts in local papers, radio, social media and on its website. It also put-up signage in the cemetery on all gates and sections.
15. There are over 10,000 memorials in the cemetery, and just over 1000 were levelled because of safety testing. Most memorials that failed the test were installed in the 1980s and 1990s. The cemetery complained about had more memorials installed during that time than any of the previous cemeteries tested, which accounts for why the failure rate in this cemetery was significantly higher.
16. The Council said it expresses its sincere apologies to all grave owners about the memorial inspections, but it had to comply with its responsibilities. It understands it can be upsetting to visiting families, but followed the correct training, guidance, policy and procedures.

Analysis

17. There is no evidence of fault in the way the Council carried out the testing.
18. The Council followed its policy and procedures. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached that is likely to have affected the outcome. As there is no fault, I cannot question the decision.

Back to top

Final decision

19. I do not find fault with the Council for levelling headstones.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman