Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council charging for a replacement refuse bin. This is because there is insufficient personal injustice caused to him by the matter to warrant further investigation and it would not be a good use of our limited resources.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council charged him to replace a stolen bin. He says the Council has failed to consider his personal circumstances and did not provide an interim waste solution while he waited for the replacement bin.

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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X complains his bin was stolen and the Council said he would have to pay £35 for a replacement bin. He says it did not consider his personal circumstances which made it difficult for him to pay the charge.
6. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint. It said the Council charges £35 for a replacement bin, there were no discounts available, and it applied the charge in line with its policy.
7. I recognise Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision to charge for a replacement bin. However, the financial impact of a £35 replacement bin charge does not amount to a significant personal injustice to him which warrants further investigation. Also, we have limited resources and must use public money carefully. The charge for a replacement bin is relatively modest and does not justify public money being spent on an investigation by the Ombudsman.
8. Mr X also says the Council did not provide an interim solution while he was waiting for the replacement bin and did not address the public health concerns he raised. I recognise this caused Mr X some inconvenience. However, this does not amount to a significant personal injustice warranting further investigation.
9. Mr X 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

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient personal injustice caused to him by the matter to warrant further investigation and it would not be a good use of our limited resources.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman