East Sussex County Council (24 009 573)

Category : Environment and regulation > Refuse and recycling

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 08 Oct 2024

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that a bicycle he bought from a household waste recycling centre shop was not fit for purpose. This is because the injustice he claims is not significant enough to warrant investigation and if Mr X believes he is entitled to a refund it would be reasonable for him to take the matter to court.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, Mr X, complains he bought a bicycle from a council household waste recycling centre (HWRC) shop which was not fit for purpose.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect 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 the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
  2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Mr X had an opportunity to inspect and test the bicycle and if he was not satisfied with its condition he did not have to buy it. He did, but he then had it inspected and found there were several issues with it. At that point he tried to return it but the shop would not take it back.
  2. If Mr X believes he is entitled to a refund it would be reasonable for him to make a claim for this at court. It is not for us to decide whether the bicycle was mis-sold and the amount Mr X paid (£80) is not significant enough to warrant investigation in any event.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the injustice Mr X claims is not significant enough to warrant investigation and if Mr X believes he is entitled to a refund it would be reasonable for him to make a claim at court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings