Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a missed refuse collection. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant a further investigation by this office.

The complaint

1. Mr X is a trustee of a charity. He complains on behalf of the charity about a missed refuse collection at the charity premises and about the Council’s decision not to return to complete the collection. Mr X says the Council failed to answer all his questions on the matter and did not take action against the neighbour who put items in the bin, which caused it not to be collected. Mr X disposed of the waste himself and asked the Council to pay him £1000 for doing so.

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 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)
3. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (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 and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complained to the Council that it missed a refuse collection at the charity premises.
7. The Council told Mr X the collection was not made because the bin was overfilled and the lid was not closed. It explained that, in line with its policy, it is not obliged to collect waste left out for collection if the requirements for collection are not met. It said it would not return to empty the bin until the next scheduled collection.
8. Mr X explained the bin was not overfilled by the charity. It was a neighbour who put items in the bin. He said the Council should still remove at least one level bin worth of waste even if other people have overfilled the bin. Mr X disposed of the waste himself rather than waiting until the next scheduled collection.
9. The Council acknowledged the collection not being made was not due to fault by the charity but explained its crews do not know who has put waste in the bins. It acted in line with its policy in not collecting the bin.
10. The Council provided Mr X with advice on how and when to place the bin for collection to try to prevent this issue from recurring. It also noted this was the first occasion this issue had occurred. It asked Mr X to provide any evidence he has of people placing their waste in the charity’s bin so that it can write to them, advising them to use their own bins and to explain the penalties that could apply.
11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council here to warrant an investigation. The Council acted in line with its published policy and it has clearly explained this to Mr X. The missed collection was due to the alleged actions of neighbours rather than fault by the Council as it acted in line with its policy. The Council is not obliged to collect waste that is placed for collection if it does not meet the requirements set out in its policy.
12. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes it followed to make its decision. In considering this matter the Council took account of the information Mr X provided as well as its own policy. There is no sign of fault in how it made its decision and so we cannot question whether it was right or wrong, regardless of whether Mr X disagrees with it.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman