Summary: We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s bin service, and how officers dealt with their complaint. We cannot rule on their claims the Council is fully or partly responsible for damage to their gate or for a break‑in at their home, as they are legal liability issues. It is reasonable for Mr and Mrs X to pursue the liability decisions they seek at court. We do not investigate council complaint or claims handling where we are not investigating the core issues giving rise to the claim or complaint. Other bin service issues do not cause Mr and Mrs X sufficient personal injustice to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr and Mrs X receive an assisted bin collection. They have a gate which was used primarily by bin crews to access their property and empty the bins. Mr and Mrs X complain:
1. the Council’s bin contractors damaged and broke the gate, and the Council has refused to fund the repairs;
2. bin staff left refuse sacks visible at their property while they were away;
3. the Council failed to properly consider and deal with their claim of property damage and their complaints.
2. Mr and Mrs X say it is inconvenient not to be able to use the broken gate and it will cost them at least £350 to repair. They say the refuse sacks signalled they were away so contributed to a break-in at their property, which caused them shock and distress. They have spent time and been put to the trouble of pursuing the matters over many months. Mr and Mrs X want the Council to:
• accept responsibility for the damage to the gate by paying for its repair;
• pay them £100 each for the upset caused by the break-in;
• make sure bin staff to treat their property with respect;
• re-train staff to not leave bin sacks on show;
• pay them £200 for their time and trouble.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
5. 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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement; or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information from Mr and Mrs X and the Council, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The core issue in the complaint is the disrepair of Mr and Mrs X’s gate and how that occurred. Mr and Mrs X believe the Council’s bin contractor staff are responsible because the damage has happened through their misuse and want the Council to fund the repairs. The Council and its contractor disagree. They consider the gate is in disrepair from normal use and because of its age.
8. Mr and Mrs X also say staff left refuse sacks visible at their property while they were on holiday, which they consider contributed to a break-in at their home. They want the Council to give them a remedy of £100 each for the distress and shock caused. The Council denies responsibility for the incident.
9. We cannot resolve these disputes. Mr and Mrs X allege the Council bears full liability for damage to their gate, and partial liability for the break-in. Liability for property loss and damage are legal matters which we cannot determine. Only insurers or the courts can make findings on and decide legal liability. The Council and the bin contractors have denied liability for the gate and any responsibility for the break-in. The court is the body best placed to determine Mr and Mrs X’s claims. It is reasonable for them to take these claims to court as that is the route by which they can pursue the liability findings they seek against the Council.
10. Mr and Mrs X say the Council failed to deal with their property damage claims and their complaints. We do not investigate councils’ claim or complaint handling processes in isolation where we are not investigating the core issues giving rise to the complaint. It is not a good use of our resources to do so. That limitation applies here so we will not investigate this part of Mr and Mrs X’s complaint.
11. Mr and Mrs X mention other issues with the bin service. They say they have had two bins stolen, the lid left off a bin, and one bin staff member pushing between their gatepost and hedge when leaving their property. While they may result in some annoyance, these issues do not cause Mr and Mrs X such significant personal injustice to warrant us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint because:
• their complaints about the damage to their gate and the break-in are claims of legal liability against the Council which we cannot determine;
• it is reasonable for them to pursue the legal liability decisions they seek at court;
• we do not investigate councils’ claim or complaint handling processes where we are not investigating the core issues giving rise to the complaint;
• other bin service issues mentioned do not cause sufficient personal injustice to warrant us investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman