Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about street sweeping. This is because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. We are also unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council did not sweep his road for several months and it was affected by blocked rains, surface water and leaf debris. He says the Council’s complaint response did not agree the level of service had changed and quality assurances processes were ineffective.
2. As a result, he says he had to make a Freedom of Information (FOI) request and collect doorbell cam footage as evidence. He says the Council has not listened to him when he has tried to improve the level of service and galvanise direct community support.
3. Mr X says the Council should investigate the service contract and ensure there is no repeat next Autumn.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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, or
• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

5. 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

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. The Council clearly explained its street cleaning schedule. It explained regular visits are suspended over winter months to allow focus on leaf clearing. It told Mr X how he could highlight any street cleaning needs between visits and encouraged him to do so. While the Council has not carried out street cleaning every 18 days as it aims to, I do not consider the time taken to remove the leaf debris on Mr X’s road has caused him sufficient injustice to justify our investigation.
9. Mr X has not complained to us about the leaf debris but rather about the Council’s complaint response. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are not dealing with the substantive issue. The Council also acknowledged some failings with its complaint handling. It has made service improvements and apologised. It is unlikely that further investigation will lead to a different outcome.
10. Mr X is unhappy he needed to make a FOI request to obtain information and view camera footage to confirm the frequency of street cleaning. It is unlikely that doing so caused Mr X sufficient injustice to justify our investigation.
11. Mr X also complains about the standard of the street cleaning service and its quality assurance. The Council is entitled to use its professional judgement to decide the frequency of street cleaning and how it is monitored. Our role is not to ask whether an organisation could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with what it did. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome. As the Council has a process in place for street cleaning, I consider it is unlikely that we would find fault.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. We are also unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman