Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about flooding to his property caused by water draining from land owned by the Council. The Council has offered to put in place measures to mitigate the likelihood and impact of flooding and if Mr X believes it must do more it would be reasonable for him to go to court.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council has failed to deal with surface water runoff which causes flooding to their property. They have suffered damage to their property and stress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions a council has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)
3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I reviewed Mr X’s complaint and the Council’s responses. I shared my draft decision with Mr X and considered his comments.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr X has suffered flooding to his property for several years. This results from surface water from council-owned land, which drains into Mr X’s garden and down to his house. Mr X has reported issues to the Council as the neighbouring landowner and lead local flood authority but is unhappy with its responses.
7. As the lead local flood authority the Council has responsibilities for managing flood risk from surface water runoff. It does this in accordance with its Local Flood Risk Management Strategy. The Council has fully investigated the issues experienced by Mr X and his neighbours and its report set out options for dealing with them. It has discounted several options involving large-scale work for reasons of cost but has offered to provide property-level resilience measures to reduce the risk of damage to residents’ homes. Mr X believes the Council should do more and has not accepted the Council’s offer.
8. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. As the lead local flood authority the Council’s role for dealing with flooding caused by surface water runoff is more strategic. The Council has applied its strategy to this case and offered to put in place measures to help deal with flooding to Mr X’s property; it has also explained why it will not do more. The Council’s decision is a matter of professional judgement and it is unlikely we could achieve anything more for Mr X than what it has proposed.
9. As a neighbouring landowner, the Council’s duties to Mr X are a private civil matter. There is a dispute between the Council’s experts and Mr X’s about the legality of the surface water runoff and this is a matter for the courts. If therefore Mr X believes the Council should carry out more extensive measures to stop water from draining onto his property he may wish to seek legal advice.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we could criticise the Council’s decision or achieve anything more for Mr X. If Mr X wishes to test whether the Council should do more it would be reasonable for him to take the matter to court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman