Surrey Heath Borough Council (24 016 278)
Category : Planning > Building control
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 19 Feb 2025
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a building control matter. This is because we have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions. And we cannot decide whether the Council is liable for damage to Mr X’s home as this is a matter for the Council’s insurers or the courts.
The complaint
- Mr X complains the Council failed to understand the impact of its decision to approve his neighbour’s planning application for an extension in 2010.
- He says the surface water has been re-routed and is now causing issues as the existing soakaway is not able to contain the volume of water now flowing through it.
- Mr X wants the Council to:
- Replace the original guttering down pipe hole (at ground level) if necessary.
- Replace any pipe work below ground level if necessary.
- Correct the guttering from the main dwelling.
- Ensure the pipework is still connected to the surface water sewer and is in good working condition.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- 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
- we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
- 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)
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by Mr X.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- Most building work will require building regulation approval. The regulations will set the standards for design, construction and ensure the health and safety of the people living in or around the building. The Council will normally visit the site at various stages of the build but it does not act as clerk of works or site manager. Responsibility for compliance with the regulations rests with the building owners and builders. The council’s role is to maintain the building standards for the public in general rather than protect the private interests of an individual.
- Case law has established that where a council has issued a completion certificate and the work is later found to be defective, liability for any defects rests with those that commission the work and those that carry it out.
- We will not investigate this complaint as we have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions. Also, we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X is seeking. This is because he considers the Council has been negligent and is liable for work and repairs to his home.
- We cannot make findings on claims of negligence and liability, and we cannot order the Council to carry out building works. These are legal matters only insurers or the courts can decide. If Mr X considers the Council negligent or liable for damage to his property, it is reasonable for Mr X to make a claim on the Council’s insurance and, if needed, pursue the claim at court.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions. .
- Also, Mr X wants the Council to accept responsibility and repair damage to his property. However, only the Council’s insurers or the courts can decide whether the Council is responsible for the damage and whether it should pay for repairs.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman