Summary: We will not investigate Dr B’s complaint about the Council charging her for a replacement bin. This is because Dr B has not suffered a serious or significant injustice which would justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Dr B says her wheelie bin was damaged by refuse collectors when it was emptied. Dr B complains the Council says she must pay for a replacement bin and has wrongly said the damage was due to the age of the bin. Dr B would like the Council to repair or replace her bin at no cost.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Dr B and information on the Council’s website about wheelie bins.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council’s policy is to charge a resident for a new bin if their bin is damaged during normal use. The Council is allowed to do this.
7. There is a disagreement between Dr B and the Council about whether her bin was damaged during normal use.
8. The Council says damage to the lid or hinge of a bin is likely due to age, weather conditions and wear and tear. Dr B says the bin was damaged because of rough handling by refuse collectors.
9. The Council’s comments about the likely cause of the damage to Dr B’s bin do not appear to be unreasonable.
10. We could start an investigation into the likely cause of the damage to Dr B’s bin, but I find an investigation is not justified.
11. An investigation may not help us establish the cause of the damage.
12. But in any case, the charge for a replacement standard bin is relatively modest - under £35. So, Dr B has not suffered a serious or significant injustice which would justify public money being spent on an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Dr B’s complaint because she has not suffered a serious or significant injustice which would justify an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman