Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council not entirely emptying one of his bins, not returning to complete the collection, and offering a resolution which would cause him to incur expenses. The matters complained of do not cause a sufficient significant personal injustice to Mr X to warrant us investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council:
1. failed to entirely empty one of his bins;
2. refused to revisit to remove the waste because he had not reported the issue within 24 hours of the scheduled collection;
3. only offered a resolution which would have incurred further costs for him.
2. Mr X says he paid for a service through council tax which he did not receive. He says he had to rely on the goodwill of neighbours to help remove four weeks’ worth of uncollected waste. Mr X wants a gesture of goodwill from the Council for the failed collection and for it to improve processes for resolving failed collections.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate 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 continue 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.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information from Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X says he was away when one of his bins was due for collection. The Council’s bin staff attended the collection but did not take all the waste. The Council’s policy requires residents to report a missed collection within 24 hours. Mr X did not realise the problem until after 24 hours had passed because he was away. When he reported the issue, the Council declined to send another bin lorry or collect the waste next time using bin bags. Officers suggested Mr X could take the waste to the tip. Mr X was dissatisfied with this suggestion as it would result in costs to him when he had already paid for the bin service through council tax.
6. The Council has adopted a policy to only return to resolve a collection where the issue is reported within 24 hours. Even if there were fault in the way the Council adopted this policy, or applied it here, we will not investigate. We recognise Mr X may have been caused annoyance and inconvenience by the Council’s application of its policy on failed collections and had to make alternative arrangements to remove the waste until the next scheduled collection. But this issue with the collection is not a sufficiently significant personal injustice to him which would warrant us investigating. Mr X claims financial loss resulting from the missed collection as he had paid for the service not fully received and the Council’s suggestion that he take his waste to the tip would have cost him time and money. The loss to Mr X of the fraction of his council tax which went towards the single collection he did not receive in full is insufficiently significant to warrant us investigating. It appears Mr X may have disposed of his waste with the help of neighbours, rather than taking it to the tip. The impacts on him of having to make this alternative arrangement, or any expense and inconvenience he had if he did take some of the waste to the tip, are insufficient significant injustices to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the matters complained of do not cause him a sufficiently significant personal injustice to warrant us investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman