Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about garden waste collection. The Council accepted fault, apologised for the impact, and refunded the full years cost. We are satisfied with this action and it is unlikely we would achieve anything further.

The complaint

1. Mr B said the Council failed to collect garden waste for a year, despite him having a subscription. The Council failed to reply to his correspondence about the issue and delayed responding to the complaint. Mr B said his garden has overgrown, which he finds embarrassing and frustrating. Mr B wants an apology, a refund, compensation, and an amount to cover the cost of a gardener or for the Council to clear the garden.

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:

• 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))

3. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

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. We do not investigate all complaints we receive. In deciding whether to investigate we need to consider various tests. These include the alleged injustice to the person complaining. We only investigate the most serious complaints.
7. Mr B paid for a service he did not receive; the Council has refunded the amount he paid. This puts him back into the position he would have been but for the Council’s fault. While I appreciate Mr B is frustrated not to receive the service he paid for and has had some time and trouble chasing the Council, that is not enough to justify further investigation. The Council has apologised to Mr B for his upset. On his overgrown garden, Mr B could have mitigated this injustice by cutting the garden and disposing of the waste.
8. Mr B is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with his complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because we are satisfied with the actions the Council has taken; it has apologised and refunded Mr B. There is not enough outstanding injustice to justify an Ombudsman investigation, and it is unlikely we would achieve anything further.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman