Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s investigation into flooding risks posed by a culvert. There is not enough evidence of a significant personal injustice to Mrs X and no worthwhile outcome by us investigating.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council failed to properly investigate the unlawful alteration of a culvert close to her property.
2. Mrs X says this caused uncertainty about potential flood risks and drainage capacity.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We consider complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mrs X complained the Council did not conduct a proper investigation into her concerns about a culvert. She said there had been unlawful alterations made to it.
7. The Council said the culvert was not blocked and there was no history of flooding.
8. Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
9. While I acknowledge Mrs X’s concerns about potential flooding and drainage issues, there is no evidence to suggest she has suffered a significant injustice, meeting the threshold for our involvement.
10. In any case, in its complaint response the Council said it had considered Mrs X’s concerns, carried out a site meeting and completed a Land Drainage Panel discussion regarding the culvert. These actions appear appropriate.
11. Mrs X wants the Council to reinvestigate her concerns. However, given the actions already taken by the Council, there is likely no other worthwhile outcome achievable by us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of a significant personal injustice to Mrs X and no worthwhile outcome by us investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman