Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council applies weed killer. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and insufficient evidence of injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, says the Council wastes money in the way it treats weeds. She says staff waste time by flying around on quad bikes rather than applying weed killer properly.

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:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(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 speed tracking data for the quad bikes. I invited Ms X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Ms X complained to the Council that staff were speeding around her area on quad bikes and going so fast that they could not apply the weed killer effectively. She said staff were wasting resources.
5. The Council obtained the speed tracking data for the bikes. It explained to Ms X that the data showed the bikes were traveling at an average speed of 5-8 mph and only going at faster speeds when travelling between different areas. It said they apply weed killer to foliage and the aim is to treat rather than prevent weeds. It said there was no evidence of excessive speed but said it would remind staff of appropriate behaviour when riding the bikes. It explained it had inspected the area shortly after Ms X complained and there was no concern about the level of weeds.
6. Ms X is dissatisfied with the response. She says she saw the staff riding at excessive speeds and says that the Council’s response that it will issue a reminder to staff shows something is wrong. She says the Council is wasting resources and not dealing with weeds effectively.

Assessment

7. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
8. The Council responded appropriately by checking the tracking data and establishing that the bikes were not travelling at an excessive speed. I appreciate Ms X disagrees but I cannot say that the Council’s response was wrong or that the data is wrong. And, while the Council did not uphold the complaint, it is not fault for it to take the opportunity to remind staff of the expected behaviour when using the bikes. In addition, the Council has explained that its policy is to only treat the weeds and an inspection subsequently showed that the weeds were being effectively controlled.
9. I also will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of injustice. I appreciate Ms X has concerns about the condition of her area but these concerns do not represent a level of injustice that requires an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

10. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and insufficient evidence of injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman