Derby City Council (202306566)

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202306566

Derby City Council

17 February 2025

Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration’, for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of the relocation of the communal bin storage area.

Background

The resident is a leaseholder of the property, the landlord owns the freehold of the block.
The council’s refuse department had advised the landlord to change the location of its bin store. On 8 March 2023, they put it on notice to relocate the bin store to the front of the block near the carpark by 28 April 2023. If it failed to do so, they would no longer collect the refuse from the block. It immediately started the process to re-locate the bin store to the front of the block.
The resident presented the landlord with a formal complaint and a petition signed by the other residents of the block on 28 February 2023. He said they were not happy with the plans to move the bin storage area to the front. From here, members of the public could access the bins. This could lead to the bins overflowing, mess, bad smells and vermin. He said there was also an issue of security and requested it cancelled the project.
The landlord issued its stage 1 response on 15 March 2023. It said the refuse department did not accept a previous area they identified and consulted on. It acknowledged this was not the desired location for the bins, but it had no choice but to move them where the refuse department would collect them. It agreed to implement design and security measures to prevent unauthorised use.
The resident requested the escalation of his complaint on 30 March 2023. He said screening will not improve the visibility for those on the ground floor. In the summer, the bin store would smell and prevent residents from opening their windows. This was likely to increase the risk of vermin and insects, which were a health hazard.
The landlord issued its stage 2 response on 28 April 2024. It said following a visit to the resident and his neighbour on 24 April 2024; it found the bin area clean and tidy with no evidence of smells or flies when the bin lids were closed. It re-iterated why it could not use the previously proposed area. It noted they had rejected its offer of screening, but had agreed to the bin store being painted, which it would arrange. It acknowledged that they had lost parking bays to allow for the refuse truck to access the bins. It committed to reduce parking restrictions only to refuse collection times.
The resident escalated his complaint to this Service. He was unhappy with the landlord’s response. He said the bin store was located outside of his kitchen and living room. It smelt bad, preventing him from opening his windows. He said it was overflowing with rubbish. There were sightings of rats and an increase in flies in his property.
Following further complaints from the resident about the flies and smells from the bin store. The landlord visited the resident on 2 August 2023. It has since consulted on and agreed to relocate the bin store again.

Assessment and findings

Scope of Investigation

In a recent update, the resident advised us that the landlord has still not implemented some of its stage 2 commitments. This includes fitting a resident only padlock on the bin store and reducing the parking restrictions on the 2 bays in front of the collection point, to bin collection times only.
The landlord not carrying out the actions it said it would, is a new complaint. Under the Scheme (paragraph 42.a.) the Ombudsman may not consider complaints that have not been through the landlord’s full complaints procedure. For this reason, this issue will not form part of this complaint investigation. The resident can, however, raise a new complaint with his landlord on this matter.

Relocation of the bin store

The Social Housing Regulator has set regulatory standards (consumer standards) that social housing landlords should deliver on. Its code of practice requires that “genuine consideration of tenant’s views should be at the heart of social landlord’s decision making about the delivery of landlord services.” Its safety and quality standard states that it should aim to consult affected tenants in a timely manner before the start of any planned improvement works.
When the refuse department (exact date unknown) informed the landlord that the bin store to this block was unsuitable because of a disproportionate number of accidents and incidents being reported, it sought to find another location.
The landlord said it identified another area for the bin store towards the rear of the block. It consulted with residents (exact date unknown) and over 50% of residents agreed to the relocation. However, the refuse department rejected it. The accidents had resulted from refuse collectors pulling and pushing large refuse bins long distances through the block across uneven ground. They considered the revised location to be no better for this than the existing one.
On 8 March 2023, the refuse department forced the landlord’s hand. It said it was at a point that accident and near-miss forms were being completed on a weekly basis. As a result, it was issuing them a date from when it would no longer continue to collect refuse from the block. It said the only location agreeable to them was the front of the block next to the carpark. It gave them until 28 April 2023 to move the bin store area or arrange itself for the bins to be moved for emptying to the front of the block.
While the consumer standards say that landlords should aim to consult with residents on any planned works, if the works involve no charges to residents, it is not a legal requirement to do so. With the time constraint to action the relocation and the location being dictated by the refuse department, it was reasonable not to do so on this occasion.
Understandably, residents were not happy about the proposal. They wanted the bins to remain at the back of the block. In the resident’s formal complaint (accompanied by the block petition), he stressed the bin store would become more visible at the front of the block, spoiling the view for the flats on the ground floor. It would be accessible to the public who walked or drove through the estate. This could lead to extra use and fly tipping. This would ultimately make it a messy and smelly area, attracting vermin and insects which were unhygienic.
The resident also emailed the landlord on 14 March 2023. He pointed out other blocks that still had the bin area to the rear and asked why their block was different. It responded the same day to say the refuse department had also raised issues with those sites and they too were under review for relocation to the grassed areas at the front of the blocks.
The landlord explained in its stage 1 response that the new location for the bins was not ideal. However, relocating the bin store to the front of the block was now outside of its control. The risk of refuse not being collected at all was too great, not to comply with the refuse department’s request. It was correct in its assessment. The refuse department instigated the move. The consequences of it not complying were the refuse not being collected, which was not an option. This would be untenable for those living in the block and pose a risk to public health.
The resident raised further questions on 20 March 2023 and requested escalation of his complaint on 30 March 2023. He said some residents on the ground floor now had their view blocked by timber. The landlord had not raised the plans to move the bin store at the time he purchased his property in 2020. Putting the bin store at the front was likely to have devalued his property, which he felt was unfair. He said health and safety (H&S) should work both ways. He felt a risk assessment would have been completed when it placed the bins at the back originally. He questioned the concern for residents’ H&S living so close to the bins. He also raised the issue of losing 2 parking spaces for access to the bin store.
In its stage 2 response, the landlord said to ease resident concerns about security, it would build the store to a height of 6 foot, with concrete posts, lockable gates and a padlock accessible only by residents. This was a reasonable solution to prevent unauthorised access. It also offered to landscape and plant shrubbery to screen the bin store and improve the view. The resident rejected the offer of screening.
Following a visit to the site on the 24 April 2023, it also offered to paint the timber surround to improve its appearance, which was accepted. This was all evidence it was taking residents’ concerns onboard and was attempting to provide reasonable solutions to improve the outlook for those living there.
The landlord advised the resident there were no plans to move the bin store at the time of his purchase in 2020, so it could not have advised him of these plans prior to his purchase.
Investing in ‘property’ comes with associated risk, as with any financial investment. Multiple factors can and will impact whether an investment increases or decreases in value. The freeholder (landlord) is not accountable for the impact on the value of a leaseholder’s property, following any action it is required to undertake.
The landlord acknowledged that placing the bin store at the front of the building meant residents lost 2 parking spaces to allow the bin lorries access to the bin store. To mitigate this, it agreed to ensure it only restricted parking in those spaces for refuse collection times. It agreed to set this as a precedent for all other car parking spaces affected by bin store re-location.
Regarding H&S, the landlord explained that when the bin stores were built, individual bins were in use. The council did not use the large communal bins until much later. They have to manually move these to the front of the building. There has also been an increased awareness and regulation of H&S in the workplace during this time. Particularly for moving and lifting heavy objects that may cause injury. It is a requirement now that refuse collectors should not have to move bins over 10-15 metres depending on their size. More landlords must reconsider the original location of refuse storage to ensure refuse departments meet those obligations.
Regulation of H&S in relation to domestic use bin stores is fire related. It focuses on the risk of fire and the spread to businesses and households should the contents of a bin catch alight. The regulations only calculate safe distances from accommodation for fire safety, based on refuse type, the size and material type of the container.
Bin storage management is based on good practice. Bins should have lids and good bin storage management. Owners need to ensure they have correctly calculated the facilities for their use and frequency of collection and keep the areas clean and maintained to a high standard. The landlord’s bins have lids. It committed to work with residents to ensure it maintained the bin area, to deal with any fly tipping promptly and enquired about jet washing the bins and surrounding storage area to reduce smell and pests.
The landlord visited the site as part of its complaint investigation on 24 April 2023. The gates had become unaligned, making it difficult to close and lock them, which it agreed to address immediately. On this visit it reported the bin area was clean and tidy and free from smells.
The resident has provided pictures of the bin store on other days since then. They show fly-tipped furniture, overfilled bins and spillages, which is what he said he predicted. The pictures can only show a snapshot in time. We do not know how long the bin store was in that condition, or how quickly the landlord responded. It does, however, demonstrate why residents were unhappy with it being in view and proximity to their living space.
The landlord visited later in the summer (2 August 2023), following further complaints from the resident. These were about the increased smell in the hot weather, the surge in flies and that he and his neighbour could not open their windows in the warm weather.
The landlord appropriately reviewed the impact of the conditions of the bin store on the resident and his neighbour again. It proposed a new location, which was still at the front of the block on the edge of the carpark, to meet the refuse department’s requirements. But it would be further away from the flats, in the shade of trees to prevent the refuse from heating as much in hotter weather and reducing the smell. It is noted an additional parking space would be impacted. It was not clear whether the reduced parking restrictions would apply. However, it consulted with the residents on moving the store again. It said the second relocation was approved with over 50% support for the proposal. It has also agreed to consider a roof cover to further deter smells at the resident’s request.
The relocation of the bin storage area was clearly distressing and inconvenient for the residents affected. However, the landlord did not propose this; it was a requirement of the refuse department to meet safe working conditions for its staff. If it had failed to comply, they would have withdrawn the refuse collection service.
In moving the bin store to the appointed site, the landlord acknowledged resident objections and made every attempt to put measures in place to ease their concerns. These included a high, gated construction for safety and resident access only. It offered landscaped screening and painting to improve the appearance and reduced parking restrictions to the affected parking bays. It listened and responded to all residents’ views and provided full explanations of actions taken and suggestions rejected.
The landlord has since acknowledged the significant impact the bin store was having on the resident and his neighbour during the summer months. It reviewed its position. It renegotiated another space with the refuse department and agreed to shoulder the cost to move it to a position away from the resident’s flat. In light of the above, we conclude that there was no maladministration by the landlord in its handling of this matter.

Determination

In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Scheme there was no maladministration in the landlord’s handling of the relocation of the communal bin storage area.

Recommendations

As stated in the scoping paragraph of this report, the resident told us some stage 2 commitments have not yet been implemented. As such, the Ombudsman recommends that the landlord:
1. Fits a padlock to the bin store gates that all residents in the block have access to.
2. Puts up signage to show it only restricts parking in the bays on the day and time of the regular bin collection.