Summary: The Ombudsman has discontinued his investigation into Mrs X’s complaint that the Council failed to deal with her reports of a blocked drain. This is because Mrs X’s substantive injustice lies in possible damage to her property and it would be reasonable for her to take the matter to court.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council did not respond to her reports of flooding to her property resulting from a blocked drain. She is concerned about the impact of the flooding and went to time, trouble and expense to clear away flood water and detritus from her property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I reviewed Mrs X’s complaint and the Council’s response.
5. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mrs X contacted the Council to report a broken drain outside her property in October 2019. The Council came out quickly and took action to repair the drain. It recommended a “gully flush” to ensure the drain was not blocked by debris from the broken drain but gave Mrs X no further information about this.
7. Mrs X’s property flooded that afternoon and a further six times over the following four weeks. She called the Council to request that it flush the gully to remove the debris but says the Council ignored her requests. She spent time clearing away floodwater from her property and purchased a high-pressure hose to try to clear the blockage herself. She then found out the drain was cemented closed and phoned the Council to report this as the cause of the flooding to her property.
8. The Council suggests the damage to the drain results from the actions of a power company but confirms they have now repaired this and the drain is working correctly. Mrs X is unhappy with the time it took to get to this point. She would like the Council to pay for a surveyor to assess the damage and compensate her for it. She would also like it to reimburse her for the cost of the high-pressure hose and pay her compensation for her time and trouble clearing away the water and for the stress she suffered. She would also like the Council to apologise for cementing shut the drain.

Analysis

9. It is not clear whether the flooding to Mrs X’s property was the result of actions by the power company and/or the Council. If Mrs X believes the Council is responsible for possible damage to her property she should make a claim to its insurers. If she is not happy with their response it would be reasonable for her to take the matter to court; only the courts can decide how to apportion liability in these circumstances.
10. While Mrs X is concerned about the way the Council responded to her reports and requests for action, we cannot normally investigate such matters separately. This is because they are inextricably linked to the underlying issue which, in this case, hinges on the Council’s liability for any damage to Mrs X’s property and this is a matter for the courts. Mrs X could include in any claim her time and trouble in dealing with the effects of the flooding and the expenses she incurred.
11. I have therefore discontinued my investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

12. I have discontinued my investigation into this complaint. This is because it would be reasonable for Mrs X to make a claim to the Council’s insurers and take the matter to court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman