Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to take appropriate action to address serious highway flooding for more than two years. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to take appropriate action to address serious highway flooding for more than two years. He said the Council previously provided inaccurate and misleading information and complains about the Council's recent decision not to take remedial action.
2. Mr X says this affects him and all other residents. He wants the Council to take the action it previously stated it would.

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.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complained to the Council that a pond near his home has been overflowing and flooding the street. The Council confirmed the rill next to the street is a main river and therefore under the control of the Environment Agency. The ponds which feed into the rill are privately owned.
7. Following a previous complaint to us about the same matter (24015064), the Council advised it had spoken to the riparian owner about how the water can be better controlled and it will monitor the situation. It says the riparian owner confirmed they would drop the board controlling the water flow.
8. The Council contacted the Environment Agency and discussed the waterflow. It confirms they agreed that dropping the board from the ponds too low will likely cause highway flooding and/or transfer the problem downstream. Increasing the height of the board will likely cause flooding at the site of Mr X’s concerns.
9. The Council has explained why it does not consider further action is needed at this stage, including altering the board height, unless there is a material change in circumstances. It says it will continue to monitor the effects of flooding. This is a decision the Council is entitled to make. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision, so we cannot question the merits of that decision.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman