Summary: The Council repeatedly failed to address complaints about a series of missed refuse collections, which is fault. The Council has agreed to investigate and provide a response to the complaint, and to offer the complainant a financial remedy for his time and trouble.

The complaint

1. The complainant, to whom I will refer as Mr B, says the Council’s refuse collectors have repeatedly failed to collect from his property. He raised complaints with the Council about this on a number of occasions, but has not received a substantive response.

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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I reviewed Mr B’s correspondence with the Council.
4. I also shared a draft copy of this decision with each party for their comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr B lives in a cul-de-sac. The road is supposed to receive weekly refuse collections.
6. On 28 October, Mr B emailed the Council. He said, in the previous five weeks, only one refuse collection had been completed. Although both he and other residents had reported these, no remedial action had been taken. He asked the Council to investigate. On 30 October, the Council acknowledged Mr B’s email, and said it would respond within 15 days.
7. Mr B contacted the Council again on 20 November. He said six collections of the last eight had now been missed, and asked for an update on the Council’s investigation. The Council replied on 21 November, apologised and said it would ask the relevant department for an update.
8. Mr B emailed again on 25 January. He said the problem was ongoing, and was not related to the industrial action in the city as refuse had been collected from properties on the main road.
9. The Council replied on 28 January. It apologised again, and said it would arrange for officers from the waste management department to contact him.
10. Mr B emailed again on 10 April. He said five of the previous six refuse collections had been missed, although there had been no problem with the recycling collections. He said he and other residents had attempted to resolve the problem by contacting the Council, the local Councillor, and even the refuse collectors themselves, but without success.
11. The Council replied on 11 April. It said his concerns had been directed to the relevant Director for an urgent response.
12. Mr B approached the Ombudsman on 2 May. He complained about the Council’s lack of response, and said he was now being forced to take his refuse to a Council disposal site because of the lack of collection.

Back to top

Analysis

13. When Mr B referred his complaint to the Ombudsman, we contacted the Council to confirm whether it had provided him with a formal response to his complaint. It replied to say it had not.
14. This is difficult to understand. Mr B has raised the same complaint several times. There is no question the Council has received them, as it has acknowledged each one.
15. It is also difficult to understand why the service has been so inconsistent. There have been several collections, so there does not appear to be any problem with accessibility on the cul-de-sac. Mr B also points out that collections have occurred on the adjoining main road, on dates when his road has been missed, demonstrating it is not related to industrial action.
16. It is, ultimately, for the Council to decide why the service for Mr B has been so poor, and what action it needs to take to address this. But the Ombudsman would expect to see this set out in a complaint response. So I find fault by the Council for failing to provide one.
17. This fault has caused Mr B an injustice, as it has left him in a position of frustration and uncertainty. He has also been to unnecessary time and trouble in pursuing what should be a relatively straightforward matter. The Council should recognise this, apologise, and offer Mr B a financial remedy.

Agreed action

18. Within one month of the date of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:

• provide Mr B with a substantive response to his complaint. This should seek to explain the problems with his refuse collection, and what the Council has done or intends to do to resolve them. The response should also apologise for the Council’s failure to respond previously; and
• offer to pay Mr B £150 to reflect his unnecessary time and trouble in pursuing this matter.

Back to top

Final decision

19. I have completed my investigation with a finding of fault causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman