Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the operation of the Council’s street cleaning service in Mr X’s locale. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council does not fulfil its street cleaning obligations. He says he has reported streets which have not been cleaned which the Council then say have been cleaned and close down his service request.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant, including the Council’s response to the complaint.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. In responding to Mr X’s complaint about this matter, the Council explained that routine cleansing is monitored by its Neighbourhood Officers who have decided that the required standards are being met. It went on to explain that while it does not routinely monitor service requests, it does ask residents who submit them and are unhappy with the response to contact the Council’s Recycling Team so that the report can be checked and followed up with its cleaning contractors where necessary. It noted that while Mr X had submitted service requests, he had not gone on to contact the Recycling Team and had instead raised a complaint.
6. The Council acknowledged that the street cleaning crew had failed to take photos as required when a report submitted by Mr X had been closed. However, while this fault, and a delay in completing the Stage 2 response is noted, there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council or injustice caused to Mr X to warrant an investigation.
7. Should Mr X raise further service requests and be dissatisfied with the response, he can pursue the matter further by informing the Recycling Team.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman