Summary: We will not investigate Mr Z’s complaint that his property was damaged due to the action of the Council’s waste contractor. This is because it is reasonable for Mr Z to pursue his compensation claim by taking the Council to court.

The complaint

1. Mr Z complains about damage to his front garden wall by the Council’s refuse contractor. He also says he has been caused a lot of time and trouble chasing up the Council.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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. The Act says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information provided by Mr Z.
5. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council’s waste management contractor is Veolia. Our normal approach is to hold Council’s to account for functions they have delegated to other bodies.
7. Mr Z has provided information showing that both the Council and Veolia acknowledged his claim of damage to his property. But that Veolia’s insurers contacted Mr Z nearly four months after he first reported the matter, seeking basic information, that he says he had already provided to the Council about the matter.
8. Mr Z is understandably aggrieved about the delay in progressing his claim. He complained to the Council about the time and trouble he has been put to in trying to progress his claim.
9. However, Mr Z’s next step is to pursue his claim by taking the Council to court, directly or through his building insurer.
10. This is because essentially Mr Z’s complaint is that his property was damaged because of negligence by the Council.
11. Deciding whether an organisation has been negligent usually involves looking rigorously, and in a structured way, at evidence as only the court can, to make its findings. In addition, only a court can decide if an organisation has been negligent and so should pay damages. We cannot recommend actions or payments that ‘punish’ the organisation.
12. We will not investigate. I cannot decide whether the Council has been negligent and have no powers to enforce an award of damages. So, I find it is reasonable and proportionate to expect Mr Z to ultimately pursue his claim at court.
13. Further, where we are not investigating the main issue in a complaint, we do not separately investigate the efforts undertaken to pursue a complaint. This is because it is not a proportionate use of the Ombudsman’s resources.

Back to top

Final decision

14. I will not investigate Mr Z’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect him to pursue his claim by taking the Council to court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman