Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to collect recycling waste from the communal bins near his home. Mr X said the bins overflowed and were unsightly, unsanitary, and affected property prices. We found fault as the Council did not empty the bins every fortnight as scheduled. The Council agreed to address the injustice this caused Mr X and improve its handling of cases where residents and contractors provide inconsistent information about missed bin collections.

The complaint

1. The Council failed to empty the communal recycling bins where Mr X lives and despite telling him it would deal with the problem, it failed to do so for a further six months.
2. Mr X said the overflowing recycling bins were unsanitary, unsightly, and affected the value of nearby homes. Mr X wanted the Council to ensure it emptied the recycling bins every two weeks.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), 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 have:

• considered Mr X’s written complaint and supporting papers;
• talked to Mr X about the complaint;
• asked for and considered the Council’s comments and supporting papers about the complaint; and
• given Mr X and the Council an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background

6. Councils have a duty under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to collect household waste and recycling from properties in their area. The collections do not have to be weekly, and councils can decide what bins or boxes people must use, and where they are placed for collection.
7. The Council contracts out its waste recycling service to a company. The contract says the company must collect waste for recycling every two weeks. Although the Council contracts out its waste services, it holds ultimate responsibility for ensuring the quality of the service and is accountable if things go wrong.

What happened

8. Mr X’s home is among properties that share communal bins. Two sets of shared bins in two separate locations serve the properties. Mr X’s complaint concerned the bin set closest to his home. Mr X said the Council did not collect the recycling waste fortnightly but only following reports the bins were overflowing. In spring 2023, Mr X complained to the Council asking that it resolve the problem and collect the recycling waste fortnightly.
9. About seven weeks later, the Council upheld Mr X’s complaint and apologised but said it could not currently resolve the problem due to industrial action. The industrial action ended about a week later and Mr X chased the Council for action on the missed collections. The Council told Mr X it would ask its contractor for an action plan to deal with the problem and update him the following week. Mr X chased the Council three weeks later saying there was still no recycling waste collection. The Council said it had asked its contractor to give the case the highest priority and reminded it the bins must be on the monitoring list. The Council again apologised and asked Mr X to let it know if the next collection was missed: Mr X did so.
10. A week later, Mr X asked the Council to further consider his complaint because of the continuing failure to collect the recycling waste. It was nearly three months since Mr X made his spring 2023 complaint. The Council apologised again and said its contractor was monitoring collections and would pass monitoring information back to the Council. The Council said it would immediately follow up any future issues. The Council showed the complaint as partially upheld and signposted Mr X to the Ombudsman.
11. Ten days later, Mr X came to the Ombudsman saying the Council had not collected the recycling waste since before spring 2023. We first contacted the Council about Mr X’s complaint to the Ombudsman four weeks later.

The Council’s response to the Ombudsman

12. The Council said, about two weeks after Mr X’s spring 2023 complaint, its contractor had visited the site. The contractor had then written saying it was emptying the bins and they were not overflowing. The contractor also said it would remind the collection crew about the need to empty the bins.
13. When Mr X had asked it to further consider his complaint in summer 2023, it had again contacted its contractor. The contractor replied that another site visit had taken place. The contractor said the recycling bins seen were full but not overflowing and sent two pictures of bins. The contractor said a supervisor would meet the collection crew to ensure there were no problems emptying the bins. The contractor also said it had not seen all the bins as the bin stores had new locks that its codes could not open.
14. The Council said its contractor was emptying only one set of recycling bins serving the properties where Mr X lived. It had not emptied the other set, near Mr X’s home, because of a turnover of inexperienced staff that had not been aware of their location. Its contractor had also reported contamination of the recycling waste but provided no evidence to support this allegation.
15. The Council accepted there had been avoidable delay in dealing with Mr X’s case. However, because of the number of cases it handled, it said residents should report every missed collection. It would then have accurate information about missed collections. Here, its contractor had said it was emptying the bins and had reminded the crew about the need to collect the recycling waste. And Mr X had not reported missed collections after it sent its response to his further complaint. The next contact it had about the bins, was from the Ombudsman.
16. The Council said it would ask its contractor to monitor the bins fortnightly, in line with planned collections, so it could immediately deal with any issues. It would also ask its contractor to provide photographs to evidence collections or any contamination issues. The Council said it would share the contractor’s photographs with Mr X.

Consideration

17. The evidence showed the Council’s contractor attended the properties where Mr X lived and collected recycling waste from one set of bins. However, I found the Council failed to collect the recycling waste from the bins positioned closest to Mr X’s home since he complained in spring 2023. The evidence showed this failure arose from the contractor’s collection crew being unaware there were two sets of bins, in different positions, serving the properties, which they had to empty (see paragraph 14).
18. The evidence showed the Council knew within a fortnight of Mr X’s spring 2023 complaint that he and the contractor held differing views about the bins (see paragraphs 8 and 12). However, I saw no evidence the Council sought to clarify or resolve these differing views. And when the Council first replied to Mr X, it upheld his complaint despite the contractor saying it was emptying the bins, which were not overflowing when inspected (see paragraph 9).
19. In response to Mr X’s further complaint, the Council again failed to tell him its contractor continued to deny it was not collecting the waste or the bins were overflowing (see paragraphs 10 and 13). However, the contractor had not been able to reply fully as it said it could not access the bin stores (see paragraph 13).
20. In not sharing the contractor’s inconsistent comments with Mr X, the Council missed opportunities to find out sooner the problem concerned the two separate bin sets. This would have contributed to the avoidable delay, which the Council admitted, in resolving matters (see paragraph 15). I found fault here.
21. In responding to Mr X’s complaints, the Council also told him it would ask the contractor:

• for an action plan (and contact Mr X the following week);
• to give the case the highest priority; and
• to place the case on a monitoring list (see paragraph 9).

I saw no evidence this happened. Indeed, when the Council made these comments, its contractor was saying there was no problem with the bin collections (see paragraphs 12 and 13). I therefore found the Council at fault in misleading Mr X about what was happening.

22. The Council indicated that Mr X should have reported each missed recycling collection (see paragraph 15). I recognised the Council’s need for full information about missed collections so it could identify repeat problems. However, here, Mr X complained and then complied with the Council’s requests about reporting further missed collections (see paragraph 9). Mr X was entitled to expect the Council would investigate and, if necessary, ask him for any added information it might need to deal with the complaint. So, if following his complaint, the Council needed Mr X to report missed collections every fortnight, it should have asked him to do so.
23. The Council said its contractor found contaminated recycling waste (see paragraph 14). As I found the Council did not empty the bins nearest Mr X’s home for months, contamination of waste would likely take place. And, on finding the Council was not emptying the bins, this might have deterred some residents from bothering to recycle their waste. The Council’s avoidable delay in resolving his complaint and failure to empty the bins every two weeks, would likely have frustrated and distressed Mr X. So, I found the faults I identified caused injustice to Mr X. I therefore thanked the Council for its proposals to address the continuing problem, which were considered in the recommendations at paragraphs 24 to 27.

Back to top

Agreed action

24. To address the injustice identified at paragraphs 20 and 21, the Council agreed to:

• (within 10 working days of this decision statement) apologise to Mr X in writing; and
• (within 20 working days of this decision statement) pay Mr X £300,

in recognition of the avoidable distress and frustration he experienced because of its failure to deal with his complaint transparently, efficiently, and effectively.

25. The Council also agreed, within 5 working days of this decision statement, to write to its contractor:

• confirming the key codes for the bin stores serving the properties where Mr X lives;
• providing a plan showing both sets of bins serving the properties where Mr X lives for it to share with the relevant collection crew;
• telling it to monitor bin collections for three months to ensure it empties the bins closest to Mr X’s home every fortnight, in line with planned collections, and provide photographic evidence of each collection; and
• telling it to give written reasons and provide photographic evidence of any issues preventing a recycling waste collection from the bins closest to Mr X’s home during the three months of monitoring.

26. The Council also agreed:

• within five working days of receiving both any monitoring photographs and any written reasons for not collecting recycling waste, to share that information with Mr X. And, in cases where its contractor did not collect recycling waste, to tell Mr X how it is addressing the contractor’s reason for not emptying the bins; and
• within 10 working days of the end of the three months monitoring, to write to Mr X

• summarising the outcome of the monitoring, and
• explaining either why it is satisfied the problem is resolved or needs further monitoring.

27. I also recommended a service improvement to deal with significant inconsistencies in comments about missed bin collections. The Council agreed to send a written reminder to relevant staff about the need to clarify and address conflicting information provided by residents and its contractor about missed collections. The aim being to avoid missing opportunities to resolve collection problems as quickly as possible. The Council should send the written reminder within 10 working days of this decision statement.
28. In making the apology referred to in the first bullet point to paragraph 24, the Council should refer to the Ombudsman’s ‘apology checklist’ at: Guidance on remedies - Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman. The Council should also provide us with evidence it has complied with all the agreed recommendations set out at paragraphs 24 to 27 inclusive. For each recommendation, the Council should provide the evidence to the Ombudsman within 10 working days of compliance.

Back to top

Final decision

29. I completed my investigation, finding fault causing injustice, on the Council agreeing the recommendations set out in paragraphs 24 to 27 of this statement.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman