Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council considered Mr X’s report that a watercourse has been altered and his subsequent complaint. His complaint is late and we have seen no reason why he could not have contacted us much sooner.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed:
• To properly investigate his report that an ordinary watercourse and drainage route has been altered, obstructed, diverted or otherwise interfered with.
• To property consider whether its Land Drainage Act 1991 powers and associated byelaws were engaged.
• To check whether any consent exists for the works affecting the watercourse.
• To consider the evidence he provided; and
• To coordinate with other agencies.
2. Mr X also says the Council wrongly stated his concerns are a private dispute to avoid taking action.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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 an authority has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Authority.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. In February 2024, Mr X complained to the Authority about its failure to properly investigate his concerns and failure to act according to its available powers.
8. The Authority responded within a few days. It confirmed it is aware Mr X has been in an ongoing dispute since 2021 about this matter.
9. The response also confirmed the watercourse in question is a privately maintained watercourse. Mr X is the presumed joint riparian owner together with the owner of the land on the other side of the watercourse.
10. The Authority advised Mr X enforcement action is discretionary. It estimates the watercourse was altered about 20 years ago and it would not take enforcement action against the change. Mr X was advised to seek legal advice regarding taking the neighbouring landowner to an agricultural tribunal to resolve the matter. It also advised the tribunal will decide if he has a right to connect his package treatment plant to the watercourse.
11. Mr X chose to appeal against the Authority’s decision on his complaint to a meeting of the Board. In June 2024, he attended an Internal Drainage Board meeting. The Board dismissed Mr X’s appeal and confirmed he should take his case to the agricultural tribunal.
12. Mr X did not complain to the Ombudsman about this until December 2025. The law says a complaint must be made to us within 12 months of the complainant becoming aware of the matter. Mr X was aware of the Authority’s final response to his complaint in June 2024. Therefore is complaint is late. I have seen no reason why Mr X could not have contacted us much sooner.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is late.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman