Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s failure to deal with rubbish storage and street cleaning near her home. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council which would warrant an investigation. We cannot investigate the actions of Ms X’s social housing landlord because these bodies are not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council’s failure to keep the street near her home free from rubbish, fly-tipping and poorly-stored waste. She says the Council should prosecute residents who dump rubbish and provide more secure bin storage at the tenanted flats.

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 or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered all the information which Ms X submitted with her complaint and she has been given the opportunity to comment on the draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Ms X lives in a flat which is owned by a social housing landlord. She complained about inadequate bin storage on site and lack of a secure gate to the storage area. She also complained about fly-tipping and dumping of recycling waste on the footway in the area.
6. The Council responded with details of recent improvements in waste storage by the social housing landlord. Since 2013 the Ombudsman has had no authority to investigate the actions of social housing landlords in tenancy matters. If Ms X remains dissatisfied with the residents’ waste storage she would have to complain to the Housing Ombudsman service. This is the proper authority to consider complaints from tenants about management by landlords.
7. The Council accepted that there is a problem with fly-tipping in her area. It says it has written to residents and the street is the most patrolled area in the borough by enforcement officers. However, it can only react to the incidence of fly-tipping and it has not identified any perpetrators in the act of dumping waste to prosecute. The housing landlord is treating dumping by its tenants as a tenancy matter and has advised them of this.
8. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. The Council has made efforts to address the problems with fly-tipping but this also requires co-operation by residents.

Back to top

Final decision

9. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council which would warrant an investigation. We cannot investigate the actions of Ms X’s social housing landlord because these bodies are not within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman