Drainage archive 2021-2022


Archive has 65 results

  • Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (21 006 284)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Drainage 15-Sep-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about ownership of a drainage system. This is because this is a legal matter which has already been subject to court proceedings and it is reasonable for the complainant to seek further remedies in the courts.

  • Kent County Council (20 011 412)

    Statement Upheld Drainage 13-Sep-2021

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to reduce the risk of surface flooding to his home after it was flooded in 2018. He said the lack of action contributed to his home flooding again in 2020. The flooding in 2020 was not due to fault by the Council. The Council was at fault when it failed to update Mr X with the result of drainage investigations in 2019 after agreeing to do so. It agreed to apologise to Mr X for the frustration and uncertainty that caused him.

  • Suffolk County Council (20 013 060)

    Statement Not upheld Drainage 09-Sep-2021

    Summary: The Council’s offer to visit the site to respond to a complaint that a drainage pipe is blocked remedies the complainants concerns. This will establish if the Council is able to take action or if it is a private legal matter between two landowners.

  • Essex County Council (20 010 342)

    Statement Upheld Drainage 07-Sep-2021

    Summary: Mr D complained the Council has failed to take adequate action to resolve the flooding into his property from the highway. We find the Council delayed dealing with Mr D’s report of a blocked gully, and it failed to keep him updated. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused to Mr D.

  • Lancashire County Council (21 005 473)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Drainage 06-Sep-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to fix drainage issues. There is no evidence of fault to warrant an investigation and any investigation will not lead to a different outcome. It is also not unreasonable for the complainant to take the matter to court.

  • West Berkshire Council (21 005 421)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Drainage 02-Sep-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about drainage issues at Mr X’s property. This is because the Council wrote to him with its final response to his complaint in November 2019 and Mr X has not come to us until July 2021. Therefore, this is a late complaint and we will not investigate.

  • Thurrock Council (21 004 698)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Drainage 13-Aug-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage to the complainants property caused by flooding. This is because it is reasonable to expect the complainant to take court action for the compensation he seeks.

  • Allerdale Borough Council (20 013 275)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Drainage 10-Aug-2021

    Summary: Mr and Mrs X complained about the Council’s response to their report of a neighbour’s hardstanding which caused excess water run-off on to their property. We will not investigate the complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council or injustice caused to Mr and Mrs X to warrant investigation.

  • Hampshire County Council (20 010 139)

    Statement Not upheld Drainage 05-Aug-2021

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly claimed he was responsible for maintenance of a pipe that borders his land and has made a claim against him for repair costs. We have discontinued this investigation. The Ombudsman cannot decide who is responsible for the pipe and the claim for costs was issued to Mr X by another body and not the Council, and so the matters complained about are out of our jurisdiction.

  • City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (21 003 251)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Drainage 02-Aug-2021

    Summary: Mr X complains the Council charged him for work which it carried out following the issue of a Building Act notice. We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint. It was reasonable for Mr X to appeal against the notice to the Magistrates’ Court if he believed it was inappropriate.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings