Summary: Ms T complained the Council had not taken appropriate action following her complaints that there are rats in her street. We found the Council at fault. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms T, make a payment in acknowledgement of the injustice caused to her and to implement service improvements.

The complaint

1. Ms T complains the Council has not dealt with her complaint about rats near her property properly. She says the rats are causing a major health hazard to her young children and other local residents.
2. Ms T says the rats are being attracted to the area because of overfilling of bins, fly tipping, dog fouling, and a design fault in the bins which allows rats to get in even if they are not overfilled, which she says the Council has not dealt with.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), 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 have considered information provided by the Council and Ms T, alongside the relevant law and guidance.
6. Ms T and the Council have commented on a draft decision before this final decision was made.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

7. I have not investigated the issues which Ms T says is causing the rats to be attracted to the area. The Council says it did not receive separate complaints about over-flowing bins, fly-tipping and dog fouling. It says these issues were raised in a conversation with Ms T about the rat infestation and are being dealt with separately.
8. If Ms T is unhappy with the outcome of the council’s investigation in that regard, she can raise a new complaint with this office.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

9. It shall be the duty of every local authority to take such steps as may be necessary to secure so far as practicable that their district is kept free from rats and mice, and in particular—
• from time to time to carry out such inspections as may be necessary for the purpose aforesaid;
• to destroy rats and mice on land of which they are the occupier and otherwise to keep such land so far as practicable free from rats and mice;
• to enforce the duties of owners and occupiers of land under the following provisions of this Part of this Act, and to carry out such operations as are authorised by those provisions. (Prevention of Damage by Pests Act 1949, section 2 (1))
10. Councils can:
• issue a notice requiring an owner or occupier to carry out works;
• carry out the works and recover costs from the owner if they do not do so; or
• complain to the court about an occupier preventing the owner completing works and seek that the court order the occupier to complete the works. (Prevention of Damage by Pests Act 1949, sections 4 and 5)
11. The Campaign for Responsible Rodenticide UK, Code of Best Practice, says a site survey should be carried out and used to establish any risks to human health, particularly children, non-target animals, such as pets and the environment.
12. The Code also says that during the site survey, sources of food for the rats, any signs of poor housekeeping and hygiene, or any other obvious defects should be brough to the attention of the responsible person.

What happened

13. Ms T complained to the Council that there were rats in her street in July 2023. She said overflowing bills and dog fouling in the area were contributing to the problem.
14. The Council visited Ms T four weeks later and recorded that it did not see any rats during that visit. It noted however, that the issue was likely to be stemming from the property next door. The Council noted that there was no safe place to bait so no treatment was carried out.
15. In December 2023, Ms T complained to the Council that it had not done anything, and the rat problem had continued.
16. The Council provided Ms T with a stage one complaint response and said it had carried out inspections and treatments in August 2023 and again in December 2023. It also confirmed that a further inspection would take place in January 2024 as Ms T’s area is included in an annual sewer baiting programme. The Council explained that although it cannot bait on the front of the street, it would look for any issues which might be causing the rats in her street.
17. In January 2024, the Council had a telephone call with Ms T to discuss her concerns as the rats remained a problem.
18. The following month, the Council issued a stage two complaint response. The Council explained that it uses rat poison in line with the Campaign for Responsible Rodenticide Use UK’s Best Practice Guidelines. It said it could not place bait at the front of properties, or in public places where they could be easily access by children, pets or wildlife.
19. The Council concluded that it had done what it could within the powers it has and did not uphold Ms T’s complaint.
20. In June 2024, Ms T complained to the Council again as the rat infestation is still ongoing.

Analysis and Findings

21. The Council’s records show it attended Ms T’s property four weeks after her July 2023 complaint. The Council’s website says it will aim to deal with reports of rats outside a property within five working days. The Council’s failure to attend until four weeks after the complaint is fault.
22. During this visit, the Council saw no evidence of rodent activity but noted that the issue was likely being caused by the neighbouring property. No action was taken.
23. As explained in paragraph 8, the Council has a responsibility to do what it can to keep its area free of rats. Although the Council did not think the issue was created on Council owned property, it could and should take appropriate steps to address the issue with the property owner.
24. I cannot see that the Council took any further action following the visit. No attempts have been made to contact the neighbour and have them address the issues, or to ask if it could place bait on the neighbour’s property. The Council has discretion how to address the infestation issue arising from a private property but has a duty to take action to secure that its district is free from rats and mice. The Council’s failure to do this is fault.
25. Although the Council told Ms T it had treated the area in August and December 2023, I have not seen any records of this. In any event, the problem continued.
26. On the information I have, the Council is at fault, and has caused an injustice to Ms T. I cannot say how quickly the rat infestation may have been dispersed if the Council had taken more robust action, however it is apparent that Ms T and her family would not have had to put up with the issue for as long as they have.

Back to top

Agreed action

27. Within one month of the decision, the Council has agreed to:

• Apologise to Ms T in accordance with our guidance on apologies;
• Make a payment of £350 in recognition of the impact on Ms T.

• Carry out a site visit and create a plan of action as to how the infestation will now be tackled in a timely manner.
• Take action to ensure that relevant staff are aware of their powers to respond to vermin problems originating from private property.

28. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

29. We found the Council at fault, and the Council has agreed to take action to address the injustice caused.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman