Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council deciding the complainant’s property is suitable for accommodating additional wheelie bins. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision, and it has proposed a satisfactory arrangement for the bins to be emptied.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has decided his property is suitable for storing additional wheelie bins.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We can 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. So, we do not start an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we are satisfied with the action a council has taken or proposed to take.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6) & (7), as amended, section 34(B))

3. We can consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered:
• information provided by Mr X and the Council, which included their complaint correspondence.
• the Ombudsman’s decisions on similar complaints about the Council introducing additional wheelie bins.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. I appreciate Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision that his property is suitable for storing the additional wheelie bins.
6. But the Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not overrule Council decisions or tell it how it should operate its services. Rather, we look at whether there was fault in the way it makes its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot question whether it should have reached a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
7. I find there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision to justify starting an investigation. The Council has clear assessment criteria for assessing the suitability of properties for the additional bins. It assessed each property in its area as part of a wider survey before it implemented the scheme, and reviewed its decision on Mr X’s property during the subsequent complaint process. The Council was entitled to reach a decision that he has enough space to store them, particularly at the front of his property, whilst still maintaining wheelchair access. It is not fault for a council to properly make a decision with which someone disagrees.
8. Furthermore, after Mr X mentioned the need to maintain wheelchair access to his property, the Council highlighted that it was open to him to request an assisted collection. I consider this to be a satisfactory way to address any difficulties Mr X may have with presenting the bins for collection. It will be for Mr X to decide whether to use this service.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council decided his property is suitable for the bins, and it has offered to provide assistance with emptying them.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman