Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to Ms X’s report of fly tipping in her street. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s response to fly tipping she reported in 2022. She says she provided CCTV footage of the person responsible but that the Council did not take appropriate action against them.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘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 continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, 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), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council, including its response to the complaint.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms X complained to the Council about its response to a fly tipping offence she had reported in 2022. She was dissatisfied with the action it had taken, particularly as she had provided photos and video footage of who she believed was responsible.
6. The Council did not uphold her complaint and said it had removed the waste originally reported, responded to her calls and correspondence and checked there was no further supporting evidence. With regard to the person Ms X had identified as the perpetrator and her point that they had not in fact moved from their property as the Council had mistakenly believed, the Council told her it had relied on its databases which had shown a change of tenant at the address in question but, nevertheless, had spoken to the new tenants about their waste disposal responsibilities.
7. We do not investigate every complaint we receive. We are funded by the public purse and have an obligation to use the funds allocated to us in an effective, efficient and economic manner. There are insufficient grounds to warrant an investigation in this case. The Council responded to the report Ms X made and removed the rubbish and while it did not take action against the person Ms X had identified as responsible, it spoke to the people living in the property in question about their disposal of rubbish.
8. If there are further incidents of fly tipping or problems with the disposal waste which Ms X wishes to report to the Council, she can do this using the details provided already by the Council and can include any evidence she might have.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman