Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council introduced a charge for its green waste collection as there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigating.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council did not properly consider how the introduction of a charge to collect green waste would impact disabled and vulnerable households. Ms X is disabled, will be financially impacted by the charge and says she is unable to dispose of the waste by alternative means. Ms X wants the Council to waive the charge on the grounds of her disability.

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 or continue an investigation if we decide there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation or any fault has not caused an injustice to the complainant (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council. I considered Cabinet reports and viewed online the discussion which took place at Cabinet about the fee introduction proposal. I have considered the Council’s Environmental, Social and Health Impact Assessment.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

Background

5. The Council has told me that it did complete an Environmental, Social and Health Impact Assessment (Impact assessment) which highlighted that the introduction of a garden waste collection charge had the potential to negatively impact certain groups, including disabled people. It explained that in error, this was not included in the papers that went to Cabinet when the scheme was voted in.
6. The Council says that soon after the Cabinet meeting, it communicated the error to members and sent them the Impact assessment. Members were asked to confirm they had read the document and whether they would have changed the way they voted, had they had the document at the Cabinet meeting. This was done within the five-day call-in period before the decision had come into effect. The Council says that no member said their vote would have been different.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council has acknowledged that there was fault in the way the original decision was considered. It then took steps to rectify this and received confirmation from members that the fault did not impact on the way they voted.
8. While I recognise Ms X is unhappy about the introduction of the charge, the Council is entitled to make this decision under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. It is also entitled to come to a decision that residents disapprove of, after a consultation exercise. As such, I cannot see grounds for our further involvement as we could achieve no meaningful outcome by investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman