Summary: Mr X complains the Council has failed to provide a satisfactory assisted refuse collection as a reasonable adjustment. We consider there is fault by the Council. It has agreed our recommended remedy.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complains the Council is breaching the Equality Act 2010 because it failed to make and maintain reasonable adjustments when providing an assisted waste collection service.
2. He says this has caused inconvenience as his access to and from his home is often blocked.
3. He also complains the Council’s refuse collection contractor answered the complaint about its poor service at stage one of its procedure when the Council should have responded.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I have discussed the complaint with Mr X and considered the complaint and the information he provided. We made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Equality Act

7. The Equality Act 2010 provides a legal framework to protect the rights of individuals and advance equality of opportunity for all. It offers protection, in employment, education, the provision of goods and services, housing, transport and the carrying out of public functions.
8. The Equality Act makes it unlawful for organisations carrying out public functions to discriminate on any of the nine protected characteristics listed in the Equality Act 2010. They must also have regard to the general duties aimed at eliminating discrimination under the Public Sector Equality Duty.
9. The ‘protected characteristics’ referred to in the Act are:
• age;
• disability;
• gender reassignment;
• marriage and civil partnership;
• pregnancy and maternity;
• race;
• religion or belief;
• sex; and
• sexual orientation.

What happened

10. Mr X has had an assisted refuse collection service in place since at least 2016. This means that waste operatives must take the waste and recycling bins from Mr X’s front garden when collecting waste and return them to the place they came from.
11. Mr X had complained previously that the waste operatives did not return the bins properly, leaving them on his path and blocking his access. As he is disabled and a wheelchair user he could not move the bins.
12. The Council’s waste contractor agreed that a supervisor would monitor the assisted collection from September 2022. The Council has provided the following records which show there was a problem on the following days:
13. On 18 November 2022 at 11am the supervisor noted recycling bin was left on the path, it was returned to the correct place.
14. Over Christmas 2022 a different waste collection team carried out the round. A refuse bin was left on the path but the manager of the contractor says this was resolved quickly.
15. On 3 February 2023 a different waste collection team carried out the round and left a refuse bin on the path. The supervisor noted at 11 am that he returned the bin to the correct place.
16. On 17 February Mr X complained at 9am that a bin had been left on his path again. He sent the Council a photo of this.

Complaint responses

17. In January 2023 Mr X raised a complaint with the Council that it was not providing an assisted waste collection.
18. The contractor replied in mid February 2023. It agreed that its operatives had not returned bins properly on occasion, and this was unacceptable. It apologised for this. It said that a supervisor had been monitoring the service every week, checking whether the bins were returned properly. If the supervisor found the bin blocked Mr X’s path they would return the bin to the correct place. The contractor said that as the supervisor was returning the bin to the correct place the same morning of the collection, it considered the monitoring process was definitely working. A manager had also visited Mr X to discuss the issue. It had reminded staff regarding the arrangements. It did not agree that it should pay a financial remedy.
19. Later in February Mr X complained at stage two of the Council’s complaints procedure. He said the Council had repeatedly failed to provide reasonable adjustments. The Council had repeatedly failed to return bins to the correct place. He said that having a supervisor check the bins several hours later was unacceptable. He provided a photo showing a bin left on his path that morning. He also later complained that it was not acceptable for the contractor itself to respond to complaint about its poor service.
20. The Council replied to Mr X’s complaint in April. It referred to two occasions in December and February when it agreed bins were left on Mr X’s path. It considered this was quickly resolved by the supervisor who had been monitoring. The Council noted the manager of the contractor had visited Mr X. It considered the situation had improved. The contractor had liaised with Mr X’s carer and she had agreed to return the bins to the correct place if necessary. However, it also accepted that the contractor’s failure to place bins correctly was not acceptable. It said it was developing the arrangements to ensure repeat issues could be escalated more effectively. The Council accepted that the contractor should not have answered Mr X’s complaint at stage one of its complaints procedure. It apologised for this.
21. Mr X subsequently complained to the Ombudsman. He said that it was not acceptable for the Council’s contractor to check the bins several hours after the refuse collection round. The bins could be left on his path from 6:30 AM until 10 or 11 AM blocking his access.

Analysis

22. I consider that there is fault by the Council because on at least four occasions over a four-month period, bins were not returned blocking Mr X’s path. Although the contractor monitored the service, this still meant that Mr X’s path was blocked for two or three hours each time. There are also gaps in the monitoring dates, so I cannot be certain that there were not other times bins were not returned properly. Mr X says that his carer or neighbour have also moved the bins for him and the supervisor would assume the bins were returned by the operatives. Mr X said his carer had not discussed returning the bins with the contractor. I do not consider it is reasonable to expect others to rectify the fault in the service.
23. Although the contractor’s supervisor ensured that bins were returned when they were found left in the wrong place, this does not seem to resolve the issue or prevent it occurring again. I have recommended a service improvement.
24. There was fault in the Council passing the stage one complaint to the contractor for a response. This was not in accordance with its complaints procedure. The Council has apologised for this. I consider this is a suitable remedy here.

Back to top

Agreed action

25. I recommended that within one month of my decision
• the Council should pay Mr X £100 in view of its failure to provide an assisted waste collection as agreed.
• the Council should take steps together with its contractor to remind all waste collection operatives of their responsibilities when providing an assisted waste collection.
• The Council should provide details of its plan to improve the assisted waste collection service when monitoring identifies repeated failures to collect and return bins.
26. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

27. We found fault by the Council. It has agreed our recommended remedy. I have completed my investigation and closed the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman