Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the wrong refuse collection date being shown on the Council’s website, and the failure to collect the complainant’s refuse for a further two weeks. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The injustice to the complainant is not significant enough to justify our continued involvement, and the Council has already provided a satisfactory response to the complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says the Council’s website gave the incorrect collection date for his refuse, so he did not put his bin out, and the Council did not return to collect it despite promising to do so.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘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 an investigation if we decide:

• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we are satisfied with the actions a council has already taken in response to the complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6)& (7))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council, which included records of Mr X’s communications with the Council and their complaint correspondence.
4. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council accepts there was an error with its website. Following testing, it thinks this was an isolated incident, but will continue to monitor. The Council also accepts that after Mr X reported the problem and requested the collection of his refuse, there was a breakdown in communication between its Contact Centre, the officer responsible for the case, and the refuse contractor. It says this is being addressed with its contractors. The Council has apologised to Mr X for the incorrect information provided on its website, that it failed to return to collect the bin, and that the responses he received during the complaint lacked detail and accuracy.
6. I appreciate it was inconvenient and frustrating for Mr X when his refuse was not collected, and that he spent time and effort on chasing the matter with the Council and taking his refuse to the tip instead.
7. But mistakes can happen and from time-to-time most people will experience a problem with their waste collection. We need to make sure we use public money carefully and efficiently, so we would not investigate complaints where there have been one-off problems. In this case, I find the extent of the injustice to Mr X is not so significant as to justify the Ombudsman pursuing the matter further.
8. In addition, the Council has provided what I consider to be a reasonable response to the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the injustice arising from the fault is not so significant as to justify our continued involvement, and the Council has already provided a satisfactory response to the issues raised.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman