Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s failure to resolve flooding of her property. We found fault in the way the Council responded to Mrs X’s flooding reports. The Council’s fault caused injustice to Mrs X. The Council has agreed to apologise and hold a meeting with Mrs X to provide her with clear and accurate information about the Council’s plans for the area affected by the flooding. The Council has also agreed to carry out some service improvements.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the Council's failure to resolve flooding of her property, which had been occurring since 2021. 
2. Mrs X said the Council’s failings meant her property was damaged and she could not use her garden in winter months.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
6. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

7. As pointed out in paragraph five we would normally investigate only the last 12 months from the date the complainant came to us. Mrs X came to us in March 2025, four years after her first flooding report to the Council. I have decided to investigate what happened from the first report of flooding. This is because, in view of the circumstances of the case, it would be unreasonable to expect Mrs X to complain earlier as the Council kept suggesting it would take action. Besides it would be difficult to make a decision about the Council’s actions without looking at the whole period.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legal and administrative framework

10. The Council is a Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) as defined by the Flood & Water Management Act 2010. This means it has responsibility to lead on managing flood risks caused by surface water, ground water and ordinary (small) watercourses. Among other matters, the Act requires the Council to:
• prepare and maintain a strategy for local flood risk management;
• carry out works to manage local flood risks in its area;
• investigate significant local flooding incidents and publish the results of those investigations;
• exercise powers under the Land Drainage Act 1991; this contains powers to issue consent for altering, removing or replacing certain structures or features on ordinary watercourses and enforcing obligations to maintain flow in a watercourse and repair watercourses, bridges and other structures in a watercourse.
11. If the ‘proper flow’ of a watercourse is impeded, section 25 of the Land Drainage Act 1991 gives councils the power to serve a notice on a landowner requiring that they take action to resolve the problem.
12. Landowners have the primary responsibility for flood prevention. Councils’ powers as LLFAs are permissive, meaning a council has a power but, not a duty, to act. Councils need to prioritise works based on need, and act, using public funds, when they consider they are justified in doing so.
13. The Land Drainage Act 1991 also gives individuals power to go to a Land Drainage Tribunal where they consider the drainage of neighbouring land requires either the carrying out of work in connection with a ditch passing through other land or the alteration or removal of any drainage work in connection with such a ditch.

What happened

14. At the beginning of February 2021 Mrs X reported flooding of her property (Property 1) to the Council. Mrs X asked the Council to confirm it was responsible for the drainage of the area and when it would carry out its inspection. Mrs X also asked for the details of any potential measures the Council was considering as a solution both short and long-term.
15. Over a month later a local parish council (the Parish Council) also contacted the Council about the flooding.
16. After a visit from the Council’s officer Mrs X was told the Council would carry out some works to improve the drainage in the area, including Mrs X’s property. At the end of June 2021 the Council told Mrs X:
• it had completed jetting works on the road along Mrs X’s property;
• gullies outside the houses seemed to be working properly;
• it was not possible to locate a culvert pipe under the highway;
• the report suggested the need for further investigation on the private land belonging to Mrs X’s neighbour (Property 2) to locate the culverted pipe under the highway. This would be the responsibility of the owner of Property 2 who would be required to carry out the necessary investigation works. The Council said it would write to the owner of Property 2 and send them a plan of investigation so far. The Council did not do that. In its response to our enquiries the Council explained that in its complaint response it had not referred to Property 2 but to a different property (Property 3) adjacent to the road, for which the Council holds responsibility as the Local Highway Authority.
17. At the beginning of August 2021 Mrs X asked the Council for updates. Although the area had recently flooded, the water drained quickly so the works had made a difference. Mrs X was anxious to ensure the Council carried out regular maintenance of the drainage system.
18. The Parish Council discussed the continuing flooding of the area as well as the outcome of the Council’s investigation in May and November 2022. Although the Council dealt with the flooding problem in one of the affected areas effectively, specifically the north side of the road, the other area with Property 1 on the south side of the road still experienced regular flooding. The Parish Council unsuccessfully tried to contact the Council’s officer who had been corresponding with Mrs X and the Parish Council about the issue (Officer 1).
19. Between January and March 2023 the Parish Council exchanged correspondence with Officer 1. At the end of March the Council carried out another site visit.
20. At the end of August 2023 a Councillor (Councillor 1) told the Parish Council the problem of flooding had now been resolved. Councillor 1 confirmed there were some gullies which needed rebuilding.
21. The Parish Council confirmed the Council’s enforcement officer (Officer 2) visited the site and noted a possible breach of planning control. Officer 2 wrote to the property owner about this matter and was awaiting their response. The Council did not specify which property this correspondence referred to.
22. After its meeting in September 2023, the Parish Council wrote to another Councillor (Councillor 2) asking for advice on the best way to deal with the re-occurring problem of flooding.
23. In October the Parish Council again contacted the Council about the flooding. It recognised the Council carried out some works on the gullies which proved temporarily effective. Because the problem with drainage remained, the Parish Council asked that for Officer 1 to visit the site to decide on the further course of action.
24. At the end of October the Council undertook some pumping works on the highway and the verge. A few days later Mrs X reported significant flooding.
25. Mrs X contacted the Parish Council in mid-February 2024 explaining that recently carried our works did not improve the flow of water. The Parish Council said the Council would investigate and look into a long-term solution for the flooded area.
26. In mid-October 2024 the Parish Council passed to Mrs X the correspondence from the Council, which confirmed that there would be a site visit at Property 3 to check whether ditching works had been completed. If not the Council would request a date when this would happen. The Council stated: “For the letters for landowners to remind them of responsibilities this is currently going through the correct channels internally before sending out to residents in the area. This should then ensure it is clear to everyone what is required for them to complete and if this is still then not followed the council can then request action if this is deemed appropriate.”
27. Later in October 2024 Mrs X complained to the Council.
28. In its stage one complaint response the Council said:
• in February 2024 the Council carried out initial works to clear the flooding in the area and to examine the highways drainage system;
• in July 2024 the Council repaired a damaged highways drain on the third party land;
• the Council sent a letter to the owner of the “third party land” as it found out a ditch course at this property needed to be cleared;
• the Council inspected the third party’s property in October 2024 and found the ditch had not been cleared. The Council sent another letter to the owner telling them to clear the ditch within 28 days;
• from the end of November 2024 the Council was planning further works for the area, including jetting and checking the full highways drainage system with cameras.
29. Mrs X asked the Council to escalate her complaint to stage two. She said the works which the Council had carried out were in a different part of the road and had no impact on Property 1. Since the end of September 2024 her property was flooded three times.
30. After further correspondence between the Council and Mrs X, in mid-January 2025 the Council provided its stage two complaint response. The Council confirmed its position stated at stage one and added:
• Officer 1 no longer worked for the Council and the Council did not have access to his correspondence;
• during works in November 2024 the Council completed jetting and CCTV inspection. It identified a collapse within the pipework running to the ditch and repaired the damage;
• when the road was closed the Council also carried out minor improvement works around the gullies;
• the Council was awaiting an investigation report to see if there were any other issues which needed to be addressed. Once the report was available, the Council would provide Mrs X with an update.
31. In her complaint to us Mrs X said the Council failed to adhere to its commitments. In February 2023 the Council told her it would finally resolve the flooding problem and would send letters to the property owners in the area explaining their riparian responsibilities. This did not happen.
32. In its response to our enquiries, at the beginning of September 2025 the Council said:
• due to failings of the report prepared after the survey of the highway drainage system in November 2024, the Council could not locate faults found within the system. The Council was trying to get missing information but also considered commissioning a different contractor to conduct a new survey;
• as the Council’s LLFA powers were permissive, it would normally take enforcement action only where the living quarters of property were affected by flood water due to the lack of maintenance from a third party. This was not the case for Mrs X, therefore no letters were sent to the owner of Property 2;
• the Council clarified that in its complaint response it was referring to the letters sent to the owners of a different property, rather than the owner of Property 2;
• the Council did not complete any actions after its stage two complaint response to Mrs X because of the incomplete survey report;
• the Council would continue to check the road by which Property 1 is situated three times per year through its scheduled safety inspection programme and would respond to any reports of flooding to ensure its highway is safe to use.

Analysis

33. Councils’ duties as LLFA are described in paragraph ten of this decision. For any enforcement action against private property owners councils’ powers are permissive.
34. As pointed out in paragraph four when investigating the events following Mrs X’s flooding reports I looked at how the Council addressed them rather than what it decided.
35. When carrying out its functions as LLFA councils should apply principles explained in our Guidance notes ‘Principles of Good Administrative Practice’. They should:
1. being citizen-focused; this is achieved by telling people what they can expect and by keeping to their commitments;
2. being open and accountable; this is achieved by:
1. providing information about policies and procedures and ensuring information and any advice provided is clear, accurate and complete;
2. stating the criteria for decision making and giving reasons for decisions;
3. keeping proper records;
4. taking responsibility for actions.
36. When responding to Mrs X’s flooding reports the Council failed to provide her with clear and consistent information on the criteria applied when addressing flooding issues and for taking enforcement action. The correspondence from the Council suggested the Council chose to deal with the problem of drainage by jetting the gullies and carrying out the survey. At no point the Council advised Mrs X it considered the area of flooding affecting Property 1 as lower priority and what its criteria for prioritising certain areas were.
37. When writing to Mrs X and the Parish Council about the works undertaken to deal with the flooding issues, the Council did not make it clear where these works took place. There are two areas along the road where the flooding occurred. The Council carried out some works in the north part of the road and not in the south part, where Property 1 is situated. Consequently referring to these works in the Council’s response to Mrs X’s correspondence and complaint was misleading. Failing to specify where the works were carried out caused confusion and made it more difficult to challenge the Council.
38. The Council’s statements about contacting the owners of the properties in the area caused further confusion to Mrs X. In the correspondence from the end of June 2021 the Council said it would contact the owners of Property 2 to give them the plan of investigation, but we have no evidence it happened. In other correspondence the Council was referring to a third-party property owner without making it clear where this property was located. In October 2024 the Council suggested it would be sending letters to the landowners in the area to remind them of their responsibilities. This did not take place.
39. The Council failed to communicate effectively with Mrs X and the Parish Council. They regularly kept asking for updates to find out what actions the Council was undertaking. At its stage two complaint response the Council told Mrs X it would provide her with an update after the survey report was completed. The Council failed to communicate with Mrs X from mid-January 2025 and Mrs X did not know the report had been prepared but the Council considered it unsatisfactory.
40. The Council also failed to keep central records of its correspondence and communication with Mrs X. Because of this the Council could not establish what had happened before Officer 1 left their job.
41. The Council’s failings described in paragraphs 36 to 40 above are fault. They caused injustice to Mrs X as, for a long time, she was uncertain of the Council’s position on the flooding. The Council’s misleading statements meant she believed it would be taking enforcement action against the owner of Property 2 and did not consider alternative solutions. She spent much time communicating with the Council and was increasingly distressed by the lack of updates.

Back to top

Action

42. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified, we recommend the Council complete within 20 working days of the final decision the following:
• apologise to Mrs X for the injustice caused to her by the faults identified. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended. The Council will provide the evidence that this has happened;
• hold a meeting on the site of Mrs X’s property to update her on the Council’s plans regarding flooding of the area where Mrs X’s property is situated and to provide her with the criteria for taking action. The Council will send us notes from this meeting;
• make a decision whether to send letters to the property owners in the area of Mrs X’s property reminding them of their riparian responsibilities. If the Council decides to send these letters, it will do so within 20 working days from the date of its decision. If it decides not to send the letters, it will communicate its decision and the reasons for it to Mrs X and to us;
• provide Mrs X with the timescales for either sending her a complete survey report or giving her updates following this report. The Council will explain which area the report will be covering. If the Council decides not to send Mrs X the survey report, it will explain its reasons.
43. We also recommend the Council within three months of the final decision:
• review its record keeping to ensure all communication and decisions are recorded on the central system;
• remind its staff responding to the flooding reports of the importance to provide updates to people who have been affected. If the Council does not intend to take any action, it should communicate it clearly, providing its reasons.

The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

44. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has accepted my recommendations, so this investigation is at an end.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman