Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about his waste recycling pods. This is because any fault has not caused a significant enough injustice to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council’s bin collection crew wrongly removed his undamaged recycling pods and then failed to:
• replace them or resolve his complaint promptly.
• address his request for escalation.
• deliver a replacement pod as claimed.
2. He said the missing pods caused avoidable distress, forcing his family to make multiple trips to the recycling centre, disrupting their routine.
3. He wants the Council to deliver his pod and review its processes to prevent similar issues for other families.

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:

• any fault has not caused a significant enough injustice to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(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. When Mr X first reported his recycling pod missing the Council arranged to send a replacement pod to his address, but he said he never received it. As a result, he had to submit another request, which he is still waiting for.
8. In its complaint response, the Council confirmed that it was handling a high volume of replacement pod requests, which it would deliver in the order they were received. In the meantime, the Council advised him to keep paper and cardboard in a neat bundle separate from his recycling bin until the replacement pod arrived or, if storage was not possible, to dispose of the items with household waste.
9. Mr X said he had to take the cardboard to the recycling centre, the Council has apologised for that, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. In addition, the Council has told Mr X how he can recycle his cardboard whilst waiting for a replacement pod. Therefore, the delay in replacement has not caused a significant enough injustice to justify investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because any fault has not caused a significant enough injustice to justify investigating and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman