The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to remove and dispose of two vehicles that belonged to him. The Council was not at fault for its handling of reports that Mr X’s vehicles had been abandoned. The Council was at fault for giving Mr X incorrect information about the date one of his vehicles was disposed of, which caused injustice. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X for the confusion this caused.
The complaint
Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to remove and dispose of two vehicles that belonged to him. Mr X says the Council did not give him enough time to reclaim property from the vehicles or to challenge its view that both vehicles had been abandoned. He would like the Council to compensate him for destroying his vehicles without notice, which should include payment to the market value of both cars.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended) If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I have considered the information Mr X has provided in support of his complaint.
I have considered the information the Council has provided in response to my enquiries.
Mr X and the organisation had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
What I found
Legislation and Government guidance The Refuse Disposal (Amenity) Act 1978 and the Removal and Disposal of Vehicle (England) Regulations 1986 (as amended) set out the legal framework for the removal and disposal of abandoned vehicles. Councils have a duty to remove abandoned vehicles from land or roads in their area.
Government guidance lists the following factors to consider when a council is deciding whether a vehicle is abandoned: There is no registered keeper on the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency’s (DVLA) database, and it is not taxed.
It is stationary for a significant amount of time.
It is significantly damaged, run down, or unroadworthy.
It is burnt out.
It has number plates missing.
If a council decides a vehicle is abandoned, it can dispose of it immediately if: It is only fit to be destroyed.
It has no number plates or tax disc.
In all other cases, the council must try to find the owner.
When removing a vehicle from land in the open air, councils: cannot charge the landowner occupier must give the landowner or occupier 15 days’ notice that they propose to remove the vehicle cannot remove the vehicle if the landowner or occupier objects during the notice period The 15-day notice period does not apply if the vehicle is abandoned on a road or highway. Councils do not have to remove an abandoned vehicle from land in the open air if the cost of moving it to the nearest highway is high (for example, special machinery is needed).
Councils cannot be held liable for damage resulting from abandoned vehicles.
After a council has removed a vehicle, it may dispose of it as it sees fit. If the vehicle is taxed, the council must wait for the tax to expire before destroying it. If the vehicle does not have road tax or number plates, a council can destroy it at any time after its removal.
What happened Mr X had parked two vehicles (Car S and Car F) in a housing estate car park. Mr X says his friend lived on the estate and was in the process of repairing his vehicles.
In March 2021, a Council Officer reported Mr X’s vehicles. The Officer said they had noticed the cars had not been moved for some time and they suspected they had been abandoned given their state of disrepair.
In January 2022, the Council Officer reported Mr X’s vehicles again. The Council’s Abandoned Vehicles Team started its investigation into the potential abandonment of the vehicles on 10 January 2022.
An Officer from the Council’s Abandoned Vehicles Team went out to inspect the vehicles on 10 January 2022. They took photographs of both cars and completed inspection reports. They noted both cars showed signs of rust. Car S had flat tyres, scratches and dents. Car F was reported to have broken windows, scratches, rust and damaged paintwork. It was also noted neither vehicle had valid road tax or MOTs. Further checks of the vehicles showed there was no finance outstanding on either vehicle. The Council also undertook checks to establish the value of both vehicles – Car S was valued between £290 and £590 and Car F was valued at £900.
The Council decided the vehicles had been abandoned and arranged for their removal from the housing estate car park on 18 January 2022. Car S was destroyed immediately, due to its low value. Car F was taken to an impound to be held for 21 days before destruction.
Mr X contacted the Council about the removal of his vehicles on 21 January 2022. He explained that his friend had been working on repairing both cars. He also asked the Council for more time to collect his vehicles as he was isolating due to COVID-19. Mr X said he was unable to leave his home for ten days. Mr X complained about the Council’s handling and said that it should have notified him when it removed his vehicles.
The Council responded to Mr X under stage one of its complaint procedures on 8 February 2022. The Council explained that it no longer had to seek and notify owners their vehicles were being removed as abandoned. The Council informed Mr X that it would store Car F until 18 February 2022 to allow him time to collect the vehicle from the impound. The Council directed Mr X to a section of its website, which explained that fees would need to be paid for the impound to release the vehicle.
The Council wrote to Mr X again on 11 February 2022 to explain it had provided incorrect information in its stage one complaint response. It apologised for this and explained that Car F had been destroyed on 7 February 2022 and it was therefore too late for Mr X to reclaim this vehicle.
Mr X made a stage two complaint to the Council about the incorrect advice he had received at stage one. He complained that the Council had not given him the chance to retrieve items held within both vehicles before their destruction. Mr X wanted the Council to compensate him for the value of the vehicles and their contents.
The Council responded to Mr X’s stage two complaint on 28 February 2022. The Council reiterated its view that both cars were in poor condition and had had no valid road tax or MOTS for some time. It also confirmed it had complied with legislation by removing vehicles that were abandoned on Council owned land. The Council advised Mr X that it would not be pursuing the recovery expenses incurred in its removal of Mr X’s vehicles and that he could seek to make a court claim if he believed the Council acted incorrectly. The Council also explained that it had given Mr X until 18 February 2022 to collect Car F from the impound before this was scrapped.
Mr X brought his complaint to us shortly after receiving the Council’s stage two response.
Was there fault causing injustice?
Government guidance says it is up to councils to decide whether a vehicle has been abandoned. I am satisfied the Council made sufficient checks and inspections of Mr X’s vehicles before deciding they had been abandoned.
In this case, the Council was not obliged to seek the owner of the vehicles before disposing of them. This is because the Council deemed both vehicles as only fit to be destroyed and having no valid road tax.
The Council exercised discretion to store Car F for a period of time before its disposal. It had no legal obligation to do this given the vehicle’s status and condition. The Council retained the vehicle for 21 days and has not sought to recover the fees associated with this from Mr X. I cannot say the Council was at fault for its approach in this respect.
The Council’s communication with Mr X was sadly poor in its stage two complaint response and shortly prior to this. The Council’s mixed messages about the date when Car F was destroyed no doubt caused confusion and uncertainty for Mr X, which the Council should address. This error does not however justify me recommending any kind of financial remedy.
Agreed action
Within one month of the final decision, the Council agrees to apologise to Mr X for the uncertainty caused by giving him inaccurate information it gave about the date it disposed of his vehicle.
The Council should provide us with evidence to show it has completed the above action.
Final decision
I have completed my investigation and uphold Mr X’s complaint. The Council’s action caused Mr X injustice, which has agreed to remedy.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman