The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Mr X complained the Council repeatedly failed to collect his household waste on the scheduled days, whilst collecting her neighbours. Mr X also complained a crew member was rude and swore at him on two consecutive weeks and refused to collect his waste. The Council’s repeated failure to collect Mr X’s household waste amounts to fault. As do the failings in the way the Council dealt with his complaint. These faults have caused Mr X an injustice.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X complained the Council repeatedly failed to collect his household waste on the scheduled days, whilst collecting her neighbours. Mr X also complained a crew member was rude and swore at him on two consecutive weeks and refused to collect his waste.
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
As part of the investigation, I have: considered the complaint and the documents provided by Mr X; made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided; discussed the issues with Mr X; Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
What I found
Refuse and recycling collections Councils have a duty under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to collect household waste and recycling from properties in its area. The collections do not have to be weekly and councils can decide the type of bins or boxes people must use.
The Council's practice is to make a weekly household waste collection and a fortnightly recycling collection.
When a resident reports a missed collection, the Depot will ask the crew to return to complete the round as soon as possible. When the Council has completed the collection, it closes the report.
What happened here Mr X complained the Council failed to collect his household waste for six or seven weeks earlier this year despite routinely collecting his neighbours’ waste. After two weeks of missed collections he went to speak to the collection crew. Mr X states he asked why the waste was not collected and a member of the crew said it was because the waste was commercial waste and Mr X would need to pay for this.
Mr X receives both commercial and domestic waste collections and disputed the missed waste was commercial. He states the member of the collection crew was abusive and swore at him and refused to collect the waste.
According to the Council’s records, Mr X reported three missed collections between February and April 2022. However, the dates these reports were closed are inconsistent and do not suggest the Council made the collections in a timely manner. The records also suggest the Council also missed other collections.
For example, Mr X reported missed collections on 11 and 18 February 2022, which the Council closed on 28 February and 9 March 2022 respectively. If the Council made a collection on 28 February 2022, it is unclear why it did not close both reports that day. Alternatively, if the Council had made the next scheduled collection on 24 February 2022, it could have closed both reports on that day.
Mr X also made a formal complaint about the missed collections and the behaviour of a member of the collection crew. He asked for an apology for the crew member’s inappropriate behaviour and to wanted to know why the crew was not collecting his waste.
The Council’s response apologised for the poor standard of service and confirmed it would speak to management regarding the crew member’s behaviour. It also explained the Council had experienced some localised disruption due to operational issues.
While Mr X was happy the Council was looking into the behaviour of the crew, he was unhappy the bins had still not been emptied. He asked the Council to review his complaint. Mr X felt the same crew member was responsible for his bins not being emptied and had been abusive to him again.
The Council reviewed Mr X’s complaint and wrote to him in almost identical terms to its initial response.
As Mr X remains unhappy he has asked the Ombudsman to investigate his complaint. Although the service has now improved and Mr X receives regular collections, he is unhappy he had to contact not only the Council, but also his MP, the Ombudsman, and another department within the Council to achieve this.
In response to my enquiries the Council states its records of reported missed collections do not indicate a repeated failure to collect the household waste.
It states it considers complaints about staff attitude in line with its procedure but does not disclose the outcome outside senior managers. The Council states it did not identify the crew member at the time of Mr X’s complaint as the Mr X’s complaint did not describe them. It has since narrowed it down to two members of the crew and an assistant service manager will speak to them and remind them of the expected behaviours.
The Council has also acknowledged that the same officer dealt with both stages of Mr X’s complaint. This is not in line with its policy and the officer has been reminded of the protocol.
Analysis It is clear from the Council’s records that it has repeatedly failed to collect Mr X’s household waste. These failings in the service amount to fault.
The Council states Mr X has only reported three missed collections, but I consider it likely the Council missed more. There are inconsistencies in the Council’s records, and I note Mr X’s complaints refer to consecutive missed collections not included in the Council’s records. I do not therefore consider the Council’s records are a reliable reflection of the extent of the missed collections.
I also consider there to be fault in the way the Council responded to Mr X’s complaints. The Council sent almost identical letters at both stages of the complaint process. These refer to disruptions to the collection service due to operational difficulties connected to COVID-19, staff sickness and a national shortage of HGV drivers. While these issues may be affecting the service, they do not appear to have been the cause of Mr X’s missed collections. The Council visited Mr X’s street and collected his neighbours’ household waste each week but missed Mr X’s. The generic nature of the responses suggests the Council had not properly investigated Mr X’s complaint.
Rude or aggressive behaviour is clearly unacceptable and we would expect the Council to take allegations of such conduct seriously. The Council states it was initially unable to identify the crew member Mr X states was abusive. There is no evidence the Council contacted Mr X for description of the crew member or that it attempted to identify them at the time of the reported incident. However, Mr X states the crew member was moved shortly after he reported the incident and is no longer part of the collection crew on his street.
The Council states it has recently narrowed it down to two possible crews members. Its actions to identify and address the behaviour of the member are to be welcomed. But it is disappointing that it did not take this action sooner. The failure to properly consider Mr X’s complaint and respond to the issues he raised in a timely manner amounts to fault.
The Council acknowledges the same officer should not have investigated Mr X’s complaint at both stages of the complaint process. This is contrary to the Council’s procedure and also amounts to fault.
Having identified fault I must consider whether this has caused Mr X a significant injustice. Mr X has experienced distress and upset at the abusive language of the collection crew member. He has also experienced frustration and disappointment, both with the missed collections and the Council’s failure to resolve the problem. The accumulated waste was untidy and unhygienic and attracts rodents. He has been put to unnecessary time and trouble in trying to resolve this matter.
Agreed action
The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and pay him £200 in recognition of the upset, frustration, and difficulties the failure to make regular waste collections has caused.
The Council should carry out this action within one month of the final decision on this complaint.
Final decision
The Council’s repeated failure to collect Mr X’s household waste amounts to fault. As do the failings in the way the Council dealt with his complaint. These faults have caused Mr X an injustice.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman