Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council not fulfilling its duty to publicise or tell her about a national government financial support scheme for flooded properties. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant us investigating. There is insufficient evidence that Council fault caused the injustice Mrs X claims.

The complaint

1. Mrs X lives in a property which flooded after a storm. She complains the Council did not fulfil its duty to publicise or tell her about a national government financial support scheme for flooded properties.
2. Mrs X says the scheme payments may have been triggered if enough people reported their flooding. She feels she and others potentially lost out on financial support. Mrs X wants the Council to offer her compensation for the lost opportunity to potentially claim from the national government scheme.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate 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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating; or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information from Mrs X, relevant online information and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. National government has a ‘Flood recovery framework’ scheme. It provides support, including financial help, to owners of flood-affected properties in England. National government ministers determine when the support from the scheme is available to an area and the eligibility criteria. Their decisions are based in part on information from local authorities on the flooded properties in their areas. The scheme uses the information from an area’s Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) to determine whether those flooded qualify for support.
6. Mrs X considers it is the Council’s duty to inform people about the national government scheme and advertise it. There is no evidence of such a duty placed on the Council in the online government guidance. We cannot say a council has committed fault where it has not done something it has no duty to do. We recognise Mrs X wanted the Council to do so, but it not advertising or referring to the scheme does not amount to fault so we will not investigate.
7. Even if the Council, which is not the LLFA for Mrs X’s area, had a duty to advertise or tell her about the scheme, we would not investigate. Mrs X argues that if the Council had told people about the scheme and residents reported flooding they experienced, this might have triggered it and made her and others eligible for its support payments. It is speculation to say Mrs X missed out on those payments and is not a finding we can make. We cannot say that if the Council had advertised the scheme this would have directly resulted in enough applicants to trigger the scheme in Mrs X’s area and her receiving payments from it. Even if all residents knew about the scheme, there may not have been enough flooded properties in the area for ministers to decide to trigger it. Some owners of flooded property may also have chosen not to report their flooding. There is not enough evidence of action or inaction by the Council resulting in Mrs X’s claimed injustice of missing out on the scheme’s payments to warrant us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because:
• there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant us investigating; and
• there is insufficient evidence of Council action or inaction causing the injustice claimed to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman