Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s delay in replacing her bin. This is because the Council apologised for the delay and an investigation is unlikely to achieve any additional outcome. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s poor communication because the claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council:
1. failed to deliver her replacement household bins within four weeks; and
2. failed to communicate with her effectively.
2. Mrs X said the matter caused her frustration and uncertainty.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, 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

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mrs X asked the Council to replace her bins which were damaged. Mrs X paid £78 to replace the bins. Mrs X said she was told the Council would replace the bins within four weeks but did not receive the replacement bins until after eight weeks. Mrs X complained to the Council.
7. In its complaint response the Council apologised for the delay. It said it arranged an additional collection for Mrs X’s waste.

Analysis

8. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. The primary matter is a four-week delay in providing the replacement bins. The Council has apologised for the delay and scheduled an additional collection. An investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to achieve anything further, and so we will not investigate this complaint.
9. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s poor communication. Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
10. Although the Council’s alleged poor communication may have caused Mrs X some uncertainty, this is not significant enough to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate most of Mrs X’s complaint because an investigation is unlikely to achieve any additional outcome. We will not investigate the remainder because the claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman