Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to arrange bin collections for a supported living facility. Mr X said this left vulnerable residents without waste collections for weeks, and bins were overflowing. He said it caused unnecessary and avoidable stress and inconvenience. We find the Council at fault and this caused injustice. The Council will apologise to Mr X and improve its service.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained on behalf of a not-for-profit organisation about bin collections for a supported living facility. Specifically, he complained that:
1. the Council said residents must pay for their own waste collections, which was not in line with its policy for supported living accommodation;
2. the Council incorrectly classified the supported living accommodation as being a care home for waste management purposes, which was not in line with its policy;
3. the Council failed to collect overflowing waste free of charge for several weeks;
4. the Council’s policy not to include staff waste as domestic waste is flawed and unfair; and,
5. the Council failed to comply with subject access requests.
2. Mr X said this left vulnerable residents without waste collections for weeks, and bins were overflowing. He said it took considerable time and effort to resolve, and caused unnecessary and avoidable stress and inconvenience. He also said there was a cost because of staff time spent cleaning up rubbish that had been blown around, and time spent trying to dispose of uncollected waste.

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)
5. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
6. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
7. We may investigate complaints made on behalf of someone else if they have given their consent. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(1), as amended)
8. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

9. In part e of this complaint, Mr X complained the Council failed to comply with subject access requests.
10. As I have said above, we normally expect a complainant to refer a complaint about data protection to the Information Commissioner. Subject access requests are about data protection.
11. I have not found any good reasons why we should investigate this part of the complaint. I consider the Information Commissioner is better placed to investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint. For this reason, I have not investigated part e of this complaint.
12. I have investigated parts a, b, c, and d of the complaint.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

13. Mr X runs the supported living facility involved in this complaint. For this reason, I find he is a suitable person to make this complaint on behalf of the supported living facility.
14. I considered the information and documents provided by Mr X and the Council. I spoke to Mr X about his complaint. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on an earlier draft of this statement. I considered all comments and further information received before I reached a final decision.
15. I considered the relevant Council policy, set out below. I also considered the Ombudsman’s published guidance on remedies.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

16. The Council’s waste management policy says it provides free waste collection for support living facilities. It says waste from care homes is classed as commercial waste and there are charges for this service.

What happened

17. The supported living facility that Mr X runs was originally a care home. This had a commercial waste collection from an independent commercial provider.
18. In late 2023, Mr X notified the independent commercial provider that the care home had become a supported living facility. The independent commercial provider stopped providing commercial waste collections.
19. Mr X spoke to the Council’s domestic waste subcontractors about arranging waste collections. They said the property was not eligible for domestic waste collection because it was a care home.
20. A few weeks after the property had become a supported living facility, Mr X contacted the Council’s waste management team. He said the property was no longer a care home, it was a supported living facility.
21. The Council said waste from residential facilities like Mr X’s facility was commercial waste. It said the facility was not eligible for domestic waste collections.
22. Mr X complained. On the same day, the Council said it would arrange waste collections until it had reviewed what Mr X said. The Council arranged waste collections by the next working day.
23. In its complaint responses, the Council said it had liaised with other departments to understand the implications and requirements of changing from a care home to a supported living facility. It said it was satisfied that as supported living accommodation, the property was eligible for free domestic waste collections.
24. The Council said it could not consider staff as residents, so any waste created by staff was considered commercial waste. So Mr X would need to arrange an appropriate commercial waste collection service.
25. The Council said its standard timescale for starting domestic waste collections is ten working days. It said as the property did not have a collection service in place, it arranged collection within a much shorter timeframe.

Analysis

Residents must pay for waste collections

26. Mr X complained the Council said residents must pay for their own waste collections, which was not in line with its policy for supported living accommodation (part a of the complaint).
27. The Council initially told Mr X that waste from the supported living facility was classed as commercial waste. This meant the residents would have to pay for this service.
28. The Council’s policy says it provides free waste collection for support living facilities. I find the Council wrongly told Mr X that waste would still be classed as commercial waste despite the property changing to a supported living facility. This was not in line with the Council’s policy and is therefore fault.
29. I find this fault caused Mr X injustice because it caused uncertainty. Mr X said if he had not challenged the Council, he would be wrongly paying for waste collection. I agree.
30. Mr X said the Council knew about the change from care home to supported living facility weeks before it took action. Mr X said he spoke to the Council and its subcontractors.
31. The Council said Mr X spoke to its subcontractors but did not speak to its own waste management service until a few days before it arranged collections.
32. As I have said above, we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened. In this case, there is a lack of evidence showing that Mr X spoke to or contacted the Council’s waste management service within the weeks between the change of the property’s status and the Council arranging waste collection.
33. On balance, I am persuaded that it is more likely that Mr X spoke to the Council’s subcontractors in those weeks. I am not persuaded that Mr X spoke to the Council’s waste management team earlier than a few days before it arranged collections.
34. I therefore find the Council did not delay implementing the free domestic waste service. I find the Council implemented the service in a shorter time than it would usually do so while it investigated whether the property was eligible for that service. This is good practice.

The Council’s classification

35. Mr X complained the Council incorrectly classified the supported living accommodation as being a care home for waste management purposes, which was not in line with its policy (part b of the complaint).
36. As I have said above, the Council initially said the property was not eligible for domestic waste collections. But on further investigation, it said it was satisfied that as supported living accommodation it was eligible for free domestic waste collection and services.
37. As I found above, the Council’s initial response was not in line with its policy. This is fault. I find this fault caused Mr X uncertainty, which is injustice.

Overflowing waste

38. Mr X complained the Council failed to collect overflowing waste free of charge for several weeks (part c of the complaint). The period Mr X referred to is between the change from a care home to a supported living facility and when the Council implemented free domestic waste collections.
39. As I have found above, I find it more likely that Mr X was speaking with the Council’s subcontractors rather than the Council’s waste management team.
40. I find the Council arranged waste collection within a few days of becoming aware of the need for the service. I therefore find no fault.

The Council’s policy

41. Mr X complained the Council’s policy not to include staff waste as domestic waste is flawed and unfair (part d of the complaint). He said everyone who gets care services at home should therefore pay for commercial waste for the waste produced by their carer.
42. Mr X may not agree with the Council’s policy, but this does not mean the policy is flawed. I find no evidence of fault in the Council’s policy.

Back to top

Agreed action

43. Within four weeks of this decision, the Council will apologise to Mr X in writing for the uncertainty it caused when it wrongly said the waste from the supported living facility was commercial waste.
44. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making this apology.
45. Within three months of this decision, the Council will remind all waste management staff, including managers, what its waste management policy is. Specifically, that its policy says supported living waste is classed as domestic waste and is therefore eligible for free domestic waste collections.
46. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

47. I have completed my investigation. I uphold parts a and b of the complaint because I find fault causing injustice. The Council will apologise to Mr X and improve its service.
48. I do not uphold parts c or d of the complaint. This is because there is no fault.
49. I have not investigated part e of the complaint. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to investigate.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman