Guildford Borough Council (21 014 823)

Category : Environment and regulation > Refuse and recycling

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 02 Feb 2022

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to provide a replacement caddy for recycling food waste. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is not enough evidence the complainant has been caused a significant personal injustice.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complained the Council had not provided a replacement caddy for recycling food waste after his existing caddy was damaged. The Council said it had none in stock. It suggested Mr X place his food waste with his main household waste or that he considers composting the food waste. Mr X purchased a replacement caddy for £15.99 and wants the Council to refund this.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. We do not investigate all the complaints we receive. We only look at the most serious and use our Assessment Code to decide which cases we will investigate. We will not therefore start an investigation into Mr X’s complaint. It is clear Mr X feels strongly about the issue at the heart of his complaint. But the main injustice he has suffered is the £15.99 he paid for a replacement food caddy. While frustrating for Mr X, the injustice is not significant enough to warrant us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence he has been caused a significant personal injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings