Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Essex County Council (19 007 327)

    Statement Not upheld Drainage 30-Jun-2020

    Summary: Mr L complains on behalf of a flood action group. They complain about the Council's inaction over flood risk to their village, particularly from the infrastructure of a major road. The Ombudsman does not have evidence of fault with the Council's decisions on flood prevention work. So we cannot question the merits of its decisions on those matters.

  • Kingston Upon Hull City Council (19 012 469)

    Statement Upheld Drainage 22-Jun-2020

    Summary: Mrs X complains the Council was at fault in the way it investigated a water leak at her property and served a Building Act Notice. The Ombudsman finds the Council was not at fault in the way it investigated the leak and served the Notice. He does find the Council was at fault in the way it responded to Mrs X's formal complaints about the matter. The Council has already apologised to Mrs X and offered a payment in recognition for the distress caused. So, the Ombudsman has completed his investigation.

  • Cornwall Council (19 006 665)

    Statement Not upheld Drainage 31-Mar-2020

    Summary: Mr B complains that the Council has failed to use its powers under the Land Drainage Act 1991 to reinstate an ordinary watercourse resulting in his property being at risk of flooding. The Ombudsman finds no grounds to criticise the Council's decision that use of its powers was not warranted in this case.

  • Staffordshire County Council (19 008 553)

    Statement Upheld Drainage 17-Mar-2020

    Summary: the complainant says the Council agreed to complete drainage works outside her home in 2016 but did not do so until 2020. When the complainant followed up the lack of drainage the Council told her it had already completed the work when it had not. The Council accepts it mistakenly confirmed it had completed the work. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault and recommends a remedy.

  • Environment Agency (19 005 527)

    Statement Not upheld Drainage 09-Jan-2020

    Summary: Mr B complained that the Environment Agency had not rectified problems caused by faulty flood defences and surface water drainage installed many years ago. We cannot find fault with the Agency's actions.

  • Worcester City Council (18 009 209)

    Statement Upheld Drainage 12-Dec-2019

    Summary: Mr C says the Council was at fault for its failure over 15 years to make the owner of a carpark install a drainage system. This, he says, allowed water to damage his property. The Council was at fault for using incorrect legislation to try to solve the problem. This raised Mr C's expectations, cost him time and trouble and caused him distress. The Council has agreed to apologise and to pay him a sum in recognition of the injustice caused.

  • City of York Council (19 004 318)

    Statement Not upheld Drainage 03-Dec-2019

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council delayed in carrying out remedial works to pipes near to his property. He said this had caused damage to his property in the past and it was causing him and his family distress. There was no fault in the Council's actions.

  • Hundred of Wisbech Internal Drainage Board (19 001 487)

    Statement Not upheld Drainage 30-Sep-2019

    Summary: Mrs C complains the Hundred of Wisbech Internal Drainage Board failed to investigate properly and take appropriate action in response to her reports of drainage problems after it consented to works affecting a private watercourse. Mrs C says her property suffers from raised levels of groundwater and standing water from November to March and she had to take action to deal with the excess water to prevent damage to her property costing approximately £700. The Ombudsman has found no evidence of fault by the Drainage Board.

  • Durham County Council (18 019 029)

    Statement Upheld Drainage 27-Sep-2019

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council, as the regulatory authority, failed to provide him with advice and assistance when his property was being damaged by a nearby landowner who was pumping water into a stream at high pressure. The Council did not respond immediately to Mr X but was not required to. It did respond to Mr X's concerns and was not at fault. It was at fault when it failed to respond to Mr X's later correspondence and to address the queries he rose. This caused Mr X some frustration and the Council has agreed to apologise to him for this. It has also agreed to review its procedures to prevent this happening in future.

  • Surrey County Council (18 014 797)

    Statement Not upheld Drainage 26-Sep-2019

    Summary: Mr B complains about the way the Council has handled a drainage problem on Mrs A's land. He says the Council incorrectly installed a drainage pipe and agreed to carry out works to the driveway which it is now refusing to do. The Ombudsman finds no fault on the Council's part.

Privacy settings

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.