Summary: The Council was not at fault for deciding Mrs X’s property was suitable for a new wheeled bin collection. It followed its process and considered information from Mrs X in reviewing its decision. The Council was at fault for the delay responding to Mrs X’s stage two review request. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mrs X.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to change her waste collection from sacks to wheeled bins, and its review of that decision. Mrs X says her property is not suitable for wheeled bins as she has no room to store them. Mrs X adds that her accessibility needs mean she will struggle to fill the bins and access her property due to the location of the bins. Mrs X says the Council’s decision has caused her distress. She wants the Council to review its decision.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Mrs X and the Council have had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Council’s household waste and recycling collections

6. 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.
7. Councils normally expect people to move their bins to the pavement in front of their property, to allow it to be easily collected. However, a council may decide to provide an assisted collection to a person if they are unable to move their bins because of a disability. Under an assisted collection, the crew will enter the person’s property, such as their garden or driveway, to collect the bins, and then return them to their storage place afterwards.
8. In January 2024 the Council approved changes to its waste and recycling service, moving from a weekly sack collection to a fortnightly wheeled bin service, with residents receiving three wheeled bins for recycling (two bins) and general waste (one bin). As part of the changes the Council said it would assess the suitability of every property in its area for a wheeled bin collection. The Council said it would assess properties through a combination of desk-based assessments and field visits where it needed more information. The Council’s criteria to not move a property to a wheeled bin service included:
• Inadequate space to store wheeled bins.
• The bin would obstruct the entrance to the property.
• Moving the bin from the storage point to the collection point would be hazardous.
9. As part of implementing the changes the Council said it would write to property owners with an outcome of their assessment and whether they would continue to receive a sack collection or move to a wheeled bin service.
10. The Council offered all properties a right of review against its decision as an alternative to its complaints process. It decided on a two-stage review system and committed to reviewing requests with 25 working days at both stages. Where a request was complicated it said it would write to the resident with its reasons why it needed more time to respond.
11. The Council continued to offer an assisted collection to residents who detailed medical or physical concerns moving the new bins. Following the changes the Council reverted to considering challenges to collection methods through its complaint process.

What happened

12. Between January and April 2025, the Council carried out assessments of properties in its area for the new wheeled bins. The Council visited Mrs X’s property on 21 February 2025 and assessed it as suitable for a wheeled bin.
13. The Council wrote to all residents, including Mrs X, in July 2025 with the outcome of their assessment. It included information about its duties under Section 46 of the Environmental Act 1990 to specify the types of waste container residents could use.
14. Mrs X asked the Council to review its decision on 2 August 2025. She said she did not have enough space to store the bins, and it would be dangerous for her to move the bins to the collection point. She said she would struggle to move the bins, and the bins would prevent her having access to a garden water butt and bench. Mrs X included photos of the front of her property with her request.
15. At the same time as it received Mrs X’s review request the Council temporarily paused sending review outcomes to review the style of responses being sent. The Council resumed sending more detailed responses on 18 August 2025.
16. The Council wrote to Mrs X on 2 September 2025 saying it needed more time to respond to her review request due to the volume of requests it had received. The Council responded to Mrs X’s review request on 15 September 2025. It decided Mrs X had adequate room for the wheeled bins and said she could be assessed for an assisted collection if she struggled to move the bins.
17. Mrs X requested a stage two review on 18 September 2025. She said the wheeled bins would obstruct her entrance and not leave enough room for her to use her walker. In response to our enquiries the Council said it did not receive this until 21 November 2025.
18. The Council launched the new wheeled bin service on 28 October 2025. In response. A stage two panel considered Mrs X’s review request on 1 December 2025 and concluded Mrs X had enough room to store the bins if she rearranged her garden furniture and bench. The Council wrote to Mrs X on 2 December 2025. It said there was room for the bins without creating an obstruction and reminded Mrs X of its powers under Section 46 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
19. Mrs X remained unhappy and complained to the Ombudsman. Following this the Council carried out another site visit on 23 December 2025 and confirmed Mrs X had enough room to store three bins.

My findings

20. The Council was entitled to make changes to how it collected waste and the containers it provided to do so. In making the changes the Council established a process for assessing properties and considering objections to the changes on a case-by-case basis. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council implemented the changes to its waste collections.
21. The Ombudsman is 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 an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether a person disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
22. The Council assessed Mrs X’s property in February 2025 and decided it was suitable for a wheeled bin. It considered her stage one and stage two challenges, reviewed her reasons and decided her property remained suitable for a wheeled bin. In making its decision, the Council took account of its wheeled bin criteria and information from Mrs X. The Council followed the appropriate procedures when making this decision and I cannot therefore criticise it. The Council was not at fault.
23. Mrs X sent the Council her stage two review request to the correct email address in September 2025. Despite this the Council did not register the review until November 2025. In total it took 75 working days to respond to Mrs X’s stage two review, a delay of 50 working days against the Council’s published timescales. While this did not impact the outcome of the review, it caused Mrs X uncertainty over the outcome of the review.

Back to top

Action

24. Within one month of the final decision the Council should apologise to Mrs X for the uncertainty caused by the delay responding to her stage two review request.
25. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

26. I find fault causing injustice which the Council has agreed to remedy

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman