Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council failed to reduce its bin collection frequency to minimise noise disruption for Mr X’s child, Y. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to make reasonable adjustments to accommodate his child Y’s health condition by ignoring requests to reduce its bin collection frequency outside their home.
2. He said the lorry noise causes Y avoidable distress and the Council’s bin crew deliberately makes excessive noise, violating Y’s human rights.
3. Mr X said the family incurred costs to protect Y from what he sees as harassment and discrimination. He wants the Council to reduce its collection frequency, schedule pickups after noon, direct nearby tenants to use alternative bins, provide compensation, and issue an apology for discrimination.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Y has a health condition making them highly sensitive to noises. Mr X said the frequent bin collection and noises from the lorries outside Y’s bedroom causes Y avoidable distress.
8. The Council confirmed a communal bin area is located opposite the family’s home, with domestic waste collected every other day and recycling collected once a week.
9. In response to Mr X’s complaint, the Council said it must fulfil its statutory duty to collect household waste. It contacted the bin collection crew to remind them to minimise noise levels as much as practicable near the property.
10. Mr X asked the Council to instruct a neighbouring property not to use the bins outside his home. However, the Council found this was neither a reasonable nor practicable request and declined to take action. Therefore we will not investigate Mr X’s complaint as there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
11. We cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act as this can only be done by the courts. If Mr X believes the Council’s actions led to discrimination against Y, that would be a matter for the courts. Mr X wants the Council to compensate the family for costs it incurred caused by the avoidable distress. We also do not consider claims around personal injury. That is a matter for the courts. Therefore, I cannot see any good reason why Mr X cannot go to court.
12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint as further investigation would not lead to a different outcome and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman