Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision he would need to pay for a replacement bin after his was damaged. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council here to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s decision he would need to pay for a replacement bin after his refuse bin and food waste bin were damaged during separate collections.

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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I also considered information on the Council’s website about bin replacements and the Council’s Recycling & Waste Service Standards which is published on its website.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X complained to the Council that his refuse bin and food waste bin were damaged during deliveries and about the Council’s decision he would need to pay for them to be replaced.
8. The Council told Mr X a charge would apply for a replacement refuse bin in these circumstances, in line with its policy, as the damage was classed as wear and tear. It said there was no charge for a replacement food waste bin.
9. The Council’s policy on charges for replacement bins is published on its website. It states: “During collection, if a bin has damaged wheels, axle, lid or a split body this is classed as general wear and tear and there will be a charge to pay for a replacement bin.” There is a delivery and administration charge of £36.50 for a replacement bin. Food waste bins are replaced free of charge.
10. 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 has considered and responded to Mr X’s request in line with its published policy which says a charge applies for delivery of a replacement bin in these circumstances. It confirmed there is no charge for a replacement food waste caddy. Whilst Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision it is one it is entitled to make.
11. 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 the Council followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong. In this case, the Council considered and responded to Mr X’s request in line with its current bin replacement policy which is set out on its website and it has clearly explained its decision. There is no sign of fault in how it made its decision and we therefore cannot question whether that decision is right or wrong even though Mr X disagrees with it.

Back to top

Final decision

12. 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