Summary: Mrs A complains the Council has not dealt properly with her refuse collection. The Council is at fault because it did not consider an alternative proposal made by Mrs A. This did not cause Mrs A any injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs A, complains that the Council have not dealt properly with her refuse collection because:
• an Occupational Therapist assessment has identified the Council’s proposed arrangements are not appropriate;
• it hasn’t considered alternative proposals she has made;
• It hasn’t explained how collection through bags will work with an assisted collection together with her mobility difficulties;
• It hasn’t provided any bags for her to use; and
• Its complaint handling was poor, it has not sent emails it says it has and hasn’t responded to her requests for information.
2. Mrs A says refuse collections have not been made, she has accumulated refuse at her property and has suffered distress and time and trouble.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we will weigh up the available relevant evidence and base our findings on what we think was more likely to have happened.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I spoke to Mrs A about his complaint and considered documents she provided. I made enquiries of the Council and considered its response and the supporting documents it provided.
7. Mrs A and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened?

8. This is a brief chronology of key events. It does not contain everything I reviewed during my investigation.
9. Mrs A would like the Council to provide an assisted collection of wheelie-bins from her rear yard.
10. A previous Ombudsman investigation found fault with the way the Council dealt with Mrs A’s refuse collection. The Council proposed to issue Mrs A with rubbish bags for her to put on her front steps on the day of collection and has said it will not provide a collection from her rear yard.
11. As part of the fulfilment of the recommendations from the previous investigation, the Council arranged an Occupational Therapist (OT) assessment for Mrs A.
12. The Council continued to offer Mrs A an assisted collection from her steps using bags. Mrs A complained to the Council that its proposed method of refuse collection was not workable. The Council did not uphold Mrs A’s complaint

Analysis

13. I have reviewed the OT’s assessment report. I have also seen emails from the OT to Mrs A and spoken to a manager from the OT service. It is clear that the OT considered Mrs A’s functional abilities.
14. The professional opinion of the OT is that Mrs A is independently mobile carrying bags, but that negotiating steps at the same time would be a high risk activity.
15. The OT confirmed in an email to Mrs A that based on her physical limitations to her mobility and upper limb function, that an assisted collection from her front door step, as proposed by the Council, was a reasonable compromise. This is not fault by the Council.
16. During the OT assessment visit, Mrs A proposed an alternative solution utilising wheelie-bins for her refuse collection, relying on her neighbours to take them to a collection point. This was detailed in the OT’s assessment report. The Council has agreed to implement a version of Mrs A’s alternative solution, whereby her neighbours present and collect her bins from a specified collection point.
17. The OT assessment report was produced in February 2022. There is no evidence the Council considered Mrs A’s alternative solution until asked to do so by the Ombudsman during this investigation. This is fault by the Council. Mrs A may have had her alternative proposal considered sooner. However, this did not cause Mrs A significant ongoing injustice because the Council had already offered her an appropriate refuse collection method.
18. Mrs A has continually raised objections to the Council’s proposed collection arrangements. Although Mrs A says the Council has not explained how its method will work, this is a matter of common sense, and she has shown an understanding of this in her communication with the Council.
19. The Council has continued to offer Mrs A an assisted collection using bags from her front steps. It has offered a collection method and considered the OT’s professional opinion regarding Mrs A’s functional abilities. It has now also agreed to an alternative solution, as set out in paragraph 16.
20. On the balance of probabilities, Mrs A’s objections are primarily because she would prefer a different method of refuse collection. The Council has considered Mrs A’s objections and the OT’s report when determining an appropriate refuse collection method. Mrs A has not had a refuse collection because she has chosen not to use the one offered by the Council. This is not fault by the Council.
21. The Council offered to provide bags for Mrs A to leave her refuse in. This was in accordance with the previous Ombudsman’s investigation. Mrs A did not accept the use of bags. The Council delivered bags to Mrs A which she then asked to be taken away. This is not fault by the Council.
22. Mrs A has shown an understanding of the requirements on her regarding the potential use of bags for refuse collections. The OT has confirmed that an assisted collection from her front door step, as proposed by the Council, was a reasonable compromise. How Mrs A manages her refuse until collection is a matter for her not the Council. This is not a matter that requires information from the Council. This is not fault by the Council.
23. Mrs A says the Council did not send her an email offering a site visit with a senior Council officer. I have seen a copy of the relevant email. It is impossible to determine now if Mrs A received the email or not. I have therefore not investigated this further. If Mrs A believes a site meeting would still be of benefit then she can ask the Council to propose new dates.

Action by the Council

24. The Council has confirmed that it will undertake a one time collection of any normal domestic refuse that remains in Mrs A’s retained wheelie bins as a gesture of good will. If there is more refuse than contained in the bins the Council says it will undertake a site visit to assess this before committing to remove it all.
25. The Council have suggested that if Mrs A is reluctant to liaise directly with the Council she may consider appointing an intermediary such as a friend, relative or neighbour to interact on her behalf.

Back to top

Final decision

26. I have found fault by the Council which did not cause Mrs A any injustice. I have now completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman