Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the steps taken by the Council when it received a report of a stray dog. This is because there we are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. The complainant, I shall call Ms X, says the Council failed to contact her as soon as possible that they had collected her dog.
2. She also complains she had to pay two days kennel fees, and the kennel was 30 miles from her home.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council received a report of a stray dog without a collar and tag. The Council says it advised the finder a warden will collect the dog. By the time the finder thought to take the dog to a local vet, the Council had already made arrangements to collect it.
7. The Council’s working hours are 9am to 5pm. The Council says it did not receive Ms X’s details from the microchip until after 5pm.
8. The dog was taken to the kennels which has a contract with the Council.
9. The following day Ms X was advised the Council had collected her dog and, after she paid the required fee, she was told where she could collect the dog.
10. I understand Ms X is concerned because the finder offered to take the dog to a local vet to have the microchip scanned, but the Council told them to take the dog home.
11. The Council’s records show it had already arranged to collect the dog from the finder before the finder contacted them to say he would take the dog to a local vet to have its microchip scanned.
12. By the time the Council received Ms X’s contact details it was after 5pm. Therefore, the dog was taken to the kennels. As the dog was at the kennels overnight, Ms X was charged for two days.
13. It is unfortunate that Ms X’s dog was found straying late in the day. However, the Council’s records show it had already arranged to collect the dog before the finder offered to take it to a local vet. The Council did not have Ms X’s contact details until outside its working hours.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because from the information we have seen we are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman