Summary: Mr & Mrs X complain about the granting of planning permission for two new houses in 2014 causing flooding at their home. They also complain about the flood resilience grant offered by the Council. We will not investigate this complaint because the Council was not responsible for granting planning permission. And I have not seen evidence of fault in the way the Council offered the grant.

The complaint

1. The complainants, who I will call Mr & Mrs X, complain the Council (which is the lead flood authority in the area):
• used flood maps produced by the Environment Agency which Mr & Mrs X believe should not be relied on; and
• failed to consult those living in the area before granting planning permission for development
2. They also complain the Council offered them a £5,000 flood defence grant on the condition they had to use the Council’s suppliers. Mr & Mrs X say this meant they would have to pay a top up of almost £5,000. They declined the grant as they believed it was too expensive and inappropriate for their 18th century home.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We cannot investigate a complaint where the body complained about is not responsible for the issue being raised. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(1), as amended)
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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)
5. 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

6. I considered the information provided by Mr & Mrs X and the Council.

Back to top

What I found

7. In 2013 the local planning authority (LPA) granted planning permission for two new houses in a field next to Mr & Mrs X’s home. They say in times of heavy rainfall the field fills up with water yet is listed by the Environment Agency as low flood risk. Yet they have suffered flooding twice since the new houses were built.
8. Mr & Mrs X say the Council should be held responsible for their home flooding. However, the Council was not consulted about the planning application in 2014. It is only a statutory consultee on developments of more than 10 properties. Any concerns about the grant of planning permission should be made to the LPA, although it is likely it is too late to make such a complaint.
9. Mr & Mrs X also complain the Council offered them a £5,000 grant for flood protection for their home, only if they used the Council suppliers and if they made up the difference in the cost.
10. The grant offered was part of a countrywide scheme. Under the terms of the scheme the property owner is expected to make up the difference. I have not seen any evidence of fault in the Council’s actions in this matter.
11. Also, if Mr & Mrs X believe the Council is liable for the flooding to their home, it is reasonable to expect them to pursue a claim for damages through the courts. Only a court can rule on whether the Council has been negligent and, if it has, whether it should pay damages to Mr & Mrs X and at what level. The courts can also enforce any recommended remedy. The Ombudsman does not have these powers.

Back to top

Final decision

12. I cannot investigate the complaint about the granting of planning permission in 2013 because the Council was not consulted on the application, nor did it grant permission.
13. Also, I have seen no evidence of fault in the way the Council dealt with the flood resilience grant scheme.
14. Finally, Mr & Mrs X can ask the courts to determine whether the Council is responsible for flooding at their home and if so to pay damages.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman