Summary: Mr X complains the Council was at fault in the way it dealt with his request to replace refuse bins after being damaged by the Council’s collection teams causing distress. The Council has accepted it was at fault by initially advising Mr X it would replace his bin free of charge. It has already apologised which is suitable action for it to take. We have found no evidence of fault in the way the Council decided Mr X was required to pay for a replacement bin, so we have completed our investigation.

The complaint

1. I have called the complainant Mr X. He complains there were failings in the way the Council dealt with his request for replacement refuse bins after being damaged by the Council’s collection crews. Mr X says there is now a health and safety issue with his waste bin as it has no lid so collects rainwater which mixes with waste.
2. Mr X says the Council initially told him it would replace the bin free of charge but is now unfairly required to pay for a new bin causing him distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the complaint and documents provided by Mr X and discussed the complaint with him. I asked the Council to comment on the complaint and provide information.
6. Mr X 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

7. The Council agreed a new refuse collection policy for its area in 2020 and issued guidance to residents. Under the Council’s policy each property has a black wheeled bin for general waste and a black recycling wheeled bin with a blue lid. The policy allows for households to have brown food waste containers and an optional black garden bin with a green lid subject to a charge.
8. The policy says it is the householder’s responsibility to replace any bin that has become damaged through wear and tear. If a bin is damaged during collection, the collection crew will report it and the Council replace the bin free of charge. But any other damage not caused by the collection crew will require householders to replace the bin for a charge. The charge is £45 for an additional general waste bin and £55 for a recycling bin. If a resident receives a means tested benefit, then they may be able to have a bin replaced free of charge.

What happened in this case

9. This section sets out the key events in this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology.
10. Mr X complained to the Council his bins were in poor condition and needed replacing due to their age as they were issued in 1987. Mr X said he moved into the property in 2021 and the bins were in poor condition then. Mr X said the recycling bin was already split and the gaps now increased. The general waste bin had been damaged six months ago when the lid became damaged and loose. Mr X believe the collection crews caused the damage. Mr X asked for replacement bins free of charge as he had not caused the damage.
11. The Council sent an email response saying it would replace the bin and deliver a new one. The Council apologised and told Mr X it and sent the email in error. The Council explained its policy about charging for replacement bins unless the resident was on a means tested benefit or the bin had been damaged and reported by the collection crews. The Council considered Mr X’s information showed the bins had been subject to wear and tear. The Council advised Mr X he would need to pay for a replacement bin.
12. Mr X was unhappy with the Council’s response and asked for a review of the decision. Mr X confirmed he did not receive any benefits but considered the damage had been caused by the collection crews. Mr X said the lid of his waste bin was now missing.
13. The Council responded and explained it policy again. It told Mr X it was the householder’s responsibility to replace bins damaged through wear and tear. The collection crews had not reported any obvious damage to the bins. This meant it must apply its policy for wear and tear and charge for a replacement bin. The Council apologised again for sending Mr X an automated email sent out advising it would replace his bin which had been a system processing error.
14. Mr X remains unhappy with the Council’s responses and considers he should not have to pay to replace bins damaged by the Council’s collection crews.
15. The Council confirms its policy and reporting system on damaged bins has been in place since 2020. It considers the reports of lost, stolen, or damaged bins. Between January 2022 and May 2023, it replaced 1,321 bins from the crews reporting damage to bin during collections. It has also replaced bins free of charge to residents on means tested benefits while other residents have been charged for replacements.

My assessment

16. The Council has accepted it wrongly sent an email to Mr X advising it would replace his damaged bin caused by a system processing error. This is fault by the Council and led to Mr X believing the Council would replace his bin free of charge. However, the Council quickly apologised to Mr X and explained its policy on charging for replacement bins. I consider the Council’s apology is suitable action for it to take to remedy any injustice caused to Mr X by its system processing error.
17. Mr X remains unhappy the Council requires him to pay for replacement bins. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes a Council followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether Mr X disagrees with the decision the Council made.
18. I have looked at the steps the Council took to consider the issue, and the information it took account of when deciding to charge Mr X to replace his bins. This included the information from Mr X, the lack of reports of damage by the collection crew and the Council’s policy. The Council decided Mr X did not met the exceptions to its policy and so needed to pay to replace his bins. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council took the decision, and I therefore cannot question whether that decision was right or wrong.

Back to top

Final decision

19. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council as it told Mr X it would replace his bin free of charge. The Council has apologised which is suitable action for it to take. There is no fault in the way the Council has made its decision to charge Mr X to replace his bins.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman