Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the time taken by the Council to trace a deceased resident’s next of kin. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, I shall call Mr X says the Council failed to trace him and 2 other relatives when their cousin died in 2017. After 4 years it engaged a company to trace the relatives.
2. He says this meant
• neither Mr X or his relatives could arrange or attend their deceased cousin’s funeral
• the property was remained unattended, meaning Mr X and the 2 other beneficiaries had to pay clearing the garden
• the amenity of the neighbours to the property suffered a negative impact
• the Council lost £5000 in council tax revenue because the property was left empty.
3. Mr X wants:
• an apology
• compensation for not being able to arrange or attend the funeral or deal with the deceased’s personal effects
• compensation for the cost clearing the garden

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. We cannot investigate something that affects all or most of the people in a council’s area. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(7), as amended)
6. 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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by the complainant, including the Council’s responses.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. Mr X’s cousin died in hospital. The hospital notified the registrar of the death, and it arranged the funeral. Therefore, I cannot say the Council’s actions caused Mr X and the other beneficiaries to miss the opportunity to deal with the deceased’s personal effects or arrange the funeral.
10. Mr X says the public purse has been deprived of roughly £5000 in council tax. The Council says the registrar reported the death in 2017. It applied a council tax exemption to the deceased’s property and confirms the account was not in debit. It sent a letter to the property confirming the exemption had been applied and requesting the name and address of the executor of the estate. It sent further letters in 2018 and 2019. An officer visited the property in 2018 and 2020 but could not contact anyone.
11. In 2019 neighbours complained about the condition of the property. The Council’s planning enforcement team visited the property. They liaised with the Council Tax department and contacted the Land Registry in an attempt to trace the owner.
12. There is no duty requiring the Council to use genealogist or ‘heir hunter’ to trace next of kin. Some do, and others do not. Often the decision to trace next of kin is because the Council has to recoup funds spent on arranging a public funeral. In this case the Council had no such expenditure to recover. I consider the Council made reasonable attempts to contact an executor of the estate by writing to the property address, visiting the site, and checking with the Land Registry.
13. Mr X also complains on behalf of the neighbours of his deceased cousin’s property. However, he has no authority to do so, and we cannot consider this part of the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

14. I will not investigate this complaint. This is because the financial loss to the Council affects all or most of the Council’s residents and this part of the complaint is therefore caught by the restriction described at paragraph 5.
15. The loss of amenity because of the condition of the property did not cause Mr X any injustice. The neighbours may make their own complaints on this point should they wish to.
16. The Council has no duty to engage genealogists to trace next of kin and there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman