Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to repossess the complainant’s allotments. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Miss X, disagrees with the Council’s decision to repossess her allotments. Miss X says problems with her health, linked to COVID-19, have stopped her from being able to work on the allotments.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. The allotment rules say the tenant must keep the plot at least 50% cultivated. This includes preparing the ground, planting, growing and harvesting crops. The remainder of the plot must be free of weeds and the area must look maintained. The Council will send one warning letter if a plot does not meet this rule. If the plot is not brought up to standard the Council can terminate the tenancy without giving any more warnings.
6. The Council sent Miss X a warning letter in May 2018 about non-cultivation. The Council says it has taken no further action since then because of COVID-19 and problems with Miss X’s health.
7. The Council sent Miss X a further warning letter in June 2022. It suggested Miss X consider giving up two of the plots if they could not be brought up to standard within a month. It repeated this offer in July and says it did not receive a response. Further inspections were carried out in August and September and there had been no change. The Council issued repossession notices and gave Miss X extra time to remove a polytunnel from one of the plots.
8. We will not start an investigation because there is not enough evidence of fault. We do not act as an appeal body and it is not our role to decide if the Council should have repossessed the plots. We can only consider if the Council followed the correct process.
9. The Council followed the correct process by inspecting the plots, raising concerns and then ending the tenancies after the plots were not brought up to the required standard. The Council took this decision after officers inspected the site and there are no grounds for me to question their judgment. The tenancy rules explain what constitutes 50% cultivation and most people would have a common-sense understanding of what a well maintained and cultivated plot looks likes. I have seen photographs of the plots and there are no grounds to find fault with the view taken by the Council about the degree of cultivation.
10. Miss X says the Council has not considered her health conditions. But the evidence shows this is not the case. It has delayed acting despite there being problems dating back to 2018. The Council offered a compromise which Miss X did not respond to. Allotments are in demand, and it is understandable the Council wants to ensure they are cultivated.
11. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and so we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman