Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide her household with a larger bin. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant a further investigation by this office.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s decision not to agree her request for a larger refuse bin. The Council refused Ms X’s request on the basis she is not recycling properly, but Miss X says this is not the case. She recycles as much as she can but still both her refuse and recycling bins are regularly full. Miss X has four children and two of her children have additional needs. The household produces a lot of waste and recycling and the bin provision is not sufficient to meet their needs.

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 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))
4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

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. Miss X asked the Council to provide her household with a larger bin to meet their needs.
8. The Council refused Miss X’s request. It explained her household’s bin provision was in line with its refuse container policy, which says a 180-litre refuse bin will be provided. It analysed the waste Miss X presented for collection and found over 40% of the waste in her refuse bin was recyclable. As a result, it found Miss X was not correctly sorting and presenting her waste for collection as required by its policy.
9. It noted Miss X’s comment that two of her children have additional needs. It invited Miss X to provide information on the impact of this on her waste requirements so that it can consider whether it meets its criteria for any additional provision.
10. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council here to warrant an investigation. It considered Miss X’s request; took account of the information she provided and made a decision in line with its published policy. It assessed Miss X’s refuse and found a significant amount of waste in Miss X’s bin was recyclable and should not be placed in the refuse bin for collection. As such it did not agree that she needed additional refuse provision. The Council’s decision is one it is entitled to make and I can see no sign of fault in how it was made.
11. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a council’s decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes it followed to make its decision. If, as here, we consider it followed those processes correctly we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong even though Miss X disagrees with it.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss 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