Summary: Mr X complains the Council was wrong to approve housing which allowed for sewage to be dealt with via a package treatment plant rather than connection to the main sewer. We will not investigate the complaint because it is a late complaint and because ongoing pollution of a beck caused by sewage from the properties is a matter for the Environment Agency to address and not the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, says the Council was wrong to approve housing which allowed for sewage to be dealt with via a package treatment plant rather than connection to the main sewer. As a result, in the years since the building of the houses, a beck in his locale has been polluted.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. I gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered what he said.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X complained to the Council about pollution to a beck in his locale caused by the sewage arrangements for some properties built a number of years ago. He said the sewage arrangements should never have been agreed by the Council.
8. The Council has said the planning matters related to applications from 2004 and 2007 and were therefore historical and that the planning conditions had been met at the time.
9. It told Mr X the issue is one of the long-term performance and maintenance of the package treatment plant and that pollution is the responsibility of the Environment Agency which, if it finds pollution is occurring, can take the matter up with the homeowners.
10. The restriction highlighted at paragraph 3 applies to matters a complainant has known about for longer than 12 months before complaining to us. Mr X says he was only aware of the extent of the problem in 2019 but even if he had complained to us at this time, it was already too late for the Council to address the matter as a planning matter.
11. The Council has told Mr X that pollution is an issue for the Environment Agency, and it is this body that is responsible for addressing the current situation at the beck.
12. In responding to my draft decision Mr X says the crux of the matter is that the recommendations of the Environment Agency that no foul water be allowed to go directly into the beck were not included in the conditions for the 2007 planning approval and that he only became aware of the problem in 2019. However, it is too late to investigate matters relating to historic planning approvals now. If Mr X is unhappy with the Environment Agency’s response to his concerns, it is open to him to use its complaints procedure to pursue the matter further.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is a late complaint and because pollution caused by the sewage arrangement is a matter for the Environment Agency to address and not the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman