Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Fixed Penalty Notice regarding waste disposal because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because the complainant could have raised a defence in court.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains about a Fixed Penalty Notice (FPN) the Council issued for a waste offence. She says the Council did not issue a warning and there are practical issues which mean she sometimes leaves small amounts of metal in the alley.

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 an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(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 Ms X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Councils can serve a FPN for waste offences. If the person pays the fine the Council closes the case. If they do not pay the Council may prosecute. The person can then raise a defence and the court will decide if they committed an offence.
5. The Council says it made many attempts to contact Ms X to discuss waste which officers found in an alley. The waste including rubbish, cardboard with Ms X’s details, recyclable waste, and metal. The Council says it left a card asking Ms X to get in touch. The Council issued a FPN because Ms X did not get in touch and the officers found more waste.
6. Ms X appealed. She explained why she sometimes has to leave a small amount of metal in the alley and said she did not receive a calling card. She asked if delivery of the card was recorded. The Council considered but rejected her appeal. It said people should only leave waste in the alley in a bin and at the correct time. It said she had left waste on numerous occasions and it confirmed a card was left. The Council gave Ms X another opportunity to pay the FPN at the reduced rate. It explained it may be prosecute if she did not pay. Ms X said she would pay but also complain.
7. In response to our enquiries the Council said another officer witnessed the delivery of the calling card and body-cams are only used when officers are speaking to someone; cameras are not use to record the delivery of cards.
8. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. I do not know why Ms X did not see the card but the Council tried an informal approach before issuing the FPN. The Council acted appropriately by considering Ms X’s appeal, explaining what would happen if she did not pay, and giving her the chance to pay at a reduced rate.
9. I also will not start an investigation because Ms X could have decided not to pay and raised a defence in court if the Council prosecuted. The courts have the power to decide if someone committed an offence; we do not have that power and it is not my role to decide if the Council was right to issue the FPN.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because the complainant could have raised a defence in court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman