Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s failure to collect her medical household waste. She also complained it failed to provide sufficient bins to meet her household’s medical requirements. We find the Council at fault for failing to consider its discretion when considering Ms X’s circumstances. This caused Ms X distress. The Council has agreed to apologise, pay a symbolic remedy, and reconsider whether to issue Ms X an additional bin. It has also agreed to implement a service improvement.

The complaint

1. Ms X says the Council has repeatedly failed to collect her household waste. She says her son is disabled and the household produces a substantial amount of medical waste. Ms X says the ongoing failure to collect this waste has left her home in an unhygienic and unsafe condition, which causes her anxiety and embarrassment.
2. Ms X wants the Council to ensure regular and appropriate collection of medical waste. She is also seeking an apology and wants the Council to review its waste management procedures to ensure they meet the needs of disabled residents.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. An organisation should not adopt a blanket or uniform approach or policy that prevents it from considering the circumstances of a particular case. We may find fault in the actions of organisations that ‘fetter their discretion’ in this way. 
5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

6. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

7. Ms X told the Ombudsman the matter she is complaining about has been ongoing for the last eight years. However, we typically expect people to bring complaints to us within 12 months of becoming aware of an issue. This investigation therefore focuses on events from October 2024 to October 2025. This includes the period Ms X approached the Ombudsman, and the 12 months before that. However, in some instances below I have discussed historic information to provide context and background.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Ms X and the Council now have an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant guidance

10. Councils have a duty under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to collect household waste and recycling from properties in their area. The collections do not have to be weekly, and councils can decide the type of bins or boxes people must use.

The Council’s waste collection policy

11. The Council collects recycling and rubbish fortnightly, on alternate weeks.
12. Every property in the Council’s district is provided with a standard 180 litre refuse bin as standard, unless a larger bin is required as set out below. Each household is also allocated a recycling bin, though the Council’s policy states there is no limit to the number of recycling bins permitted.
13. The Council’s policy states if there is a medical reason a resident requires additional waste capacity, an exchange for a larger 360 litre refuse bin will take place without charge. It says householders who create a high volume of waste due to a medical condition will be assessed on a case-by-case basis and sufficient waste capacity will be supplied to meet their needs.
14. The Council’s policy also states it will only empty refuse and recycling bins supplied by the Council. Any bins not showing the Council’s logo will not be emptied.

What happened

15. Ms X lives with her son, who is disabled and requires 2:1 care. The household produces a large volume of medical and hygiene waste.
16. The Council visited Ms X in 2021 and discussed her household’s medical need for additional bins. It provided her with one 360 litre rubbish bin and one 240 litre rubbish bin. It also delivered additional recycling bins and food caddies to Ms X’s property following the visit.
17. In November 2024, Ms X emailed the Council and said it had not collected one of her bins.
18. The Council responded and said the collection crew had not collected both bins as only one of these was Council issued. It said it had advised Ms X previously that it would only collect Council issued bins bearing its logo. It also asked if she consented to removal of the non-Council issued bin, including the waste it contained, to avoid further confusion about which bins could be presented for collection.
19. Ms X agreed to the removal and the Council collected the bin it had not issued the following week.
20. The next communication between Ms X and the Council was in September 2025. Ms X emailed the Council and said it had not emptied her three bins. She also said it had failed to collect one of the bins the previous week too. She said the medical waste from the summer period had now accumulated at her property.
21. Ms X submitted a stage one complaint to the Council shortly after this. She said the accumulation of waste from the Council’s failure to collect one of her three bins posed a serious health and hygiene risk. She stressed that this was not an isolated incident. She said her household required additional bins due to the quantity of medical waste it produced.
22. The Council issued its response two weeks later. It said it had provided two bins with a larger waste capacity in 2021. It stated it had removed a third bin, with Ms X’s agreement in November 2024. It said Ms X had then accrued another non-Council issued bin. It had arranged for the removal of this third bin, including any waste it contained.
23. Ms X requested the Council escalate her complaint to stage two of its complaints procedure. She said she had relied on the additional bin for several years, and that it was medically necessary for her to have use of a third rubbish bin.
24. The Council did not uphold Ms X’s complaint. It stated that its records showed Ms X had reported missed collections on three occasions, two of which had been because she had presented a non-Council issued bin. It reiterated that it would not collect any waste that was not presented in a Council issued bin. It said it had issued a larger bin to Ms X’s household in line with the household’s medical needs, its waste collection policy and with what other households with medical need had been allocated.
25. The Council said it attempted to collect the third bin, but Ms X had not presented it for collection. It did not reattempt collection after this.
26. Ms X approached the Ombudsman in October 2025.

Back to top

Analysis

27. The Council’s policy states it will assess a household’s medical need for additional bins on a case-by-case basis and provide a larger 360 litre bin if required. The Council is aware of Ms X’s son’s disability, and that the household produces a high volume of medical waste. It issued additional bins to Ms X’s household in 2021 following a discussion of the household’s medical need for extra waste capacity.
28. The Council acted in line with its policy when it issued Ms X with the larger, additional bin and later declined to issue a further one or empty the non-Council issued bin Ms X acquired herself. However, acting within the terms of a policy is not sufficient if the Council fails to consider individual circumstances in reaching its decision. That is what has happened here.
29. Ms X told the Council the additional provision was still not sufficient. She presented her non-Council issued bin for collection when the medical waste exceeded the capacity of her two Council issued bins. Ms X told me the waste issue worsens in the summer, as her son is at home full-time and the household consequently produces more medical waste than at other times of the year. She told the Council she was unable to manage without the third bin. However, the Council did not provide any further waste provision.
30. The Council has provided no evidence showing that it assessed the volume of waste Ms X’s household produces or whether its provision was sufficient to meet her specific needs. Awareness of her son’s medical condition is not the same as assessing what household waste provision that condition requires. It said Ms X had the same provision as other households with similar medical conditions in the district. However, the needs of other households is not a sound basis for assessing whether the provision met Ms X’s circumstances. It failed to consider the specific circumstances of Ms X’s case.
31. The Council’s policy set out what it would normally provide. The Council did not consider whether Ms X’s circumstances required more than its policy provided for. It failed to exercise its discretion in a case which evidenced a need for further waste provision. Where a policy does not fully address an individual’s circumstances, a council must consider whether those circumstances warrant a response beyond the provision its policy sets out. There is no evidence the Council did so here, which is fault.
32. The Council’s own account shows its waste provision was not sufficient for Ms X’s household. It explained it refused to collect Ms X’s third bin solely because it was non-Council issued, despite being aware this bin was full of offensive hygiene waste. Ms X said she relied on neighbour’s bins at other times where she had excess waste. The Council’s failure to consider its discretion caused Ms X distress. I have recommended remedies to address this injustice below.
33. The Council has since told the Ombudsman that, had it been aware Ms X was borrowing her neighbours’ bins to manage her waste, it would have likely replaced one of her 240-litre capacity bins with another 360-litre bin. This would have been a suitable remedy. It demonstrates that a straightforward resolution was likely available to the Council throughout the duration of Ms X’s complaint and raises the question why it did not speak to Ms X and identify the scope of the problem and reach a suitable resolution sooner. The Council’s failure to make those enquiries caused Ms X to struggle managing her household waste, which was a distressing and avoidable position to be in.
34. I recognise, however, that the Council has now acknowledged this failing and identified an appropriate remedy. The remedy and service improvements set out below are intended to ensure this situation does not recur.

Back to top

Agreed action

35. Within one month of the date of the final decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. Apologise to Ms X for the distress caused by the fault identified above.
2. Pay Ms X £150 in recognition of the distress caused by the identified fault.
3. Consider Ms X’s household needs on an individual basis and determine whether an additional waste bin is required. The Council should document its decision making and write to Ms X with its decision.
36. Within two months of the final decision the Council has agreed to review its procedure for handling medical waste requests to ensure individual assessments are carried out and recorded in all cases. The Council should document its reasoning as to whether provision meets the household’s specific needs. The Council should be prepared to offer beyond the provision stated in the policy if a person’s individual circumstances require this.
37. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

38. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise, pay a symbolic remedy, and reconsider Ms X’s case to remedy this injustice. It has also agreed to implement a service improvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman