Summary: Mr X complained about the way the Council responded to his complaint about surface water flooding. We will not investigate this complaint as it was late and there were no good reasons to exercise discretion to accept it now. An investigation could not achieve the outcome Mr X wanted.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about how the Council handled his complaint about surface water flooding on the road he lives on. Mr X wanted the Council to prevent future flooding and compensate homeowners on the street for damage and inconvenience. Mr X also wanted an inquiry in to the flooding measures in place.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information provided by Mr X in his complaint and the documents he provided. I read the documents provided by the Council. Mr X 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

5. Mr X first complained to the Council about the road flooding in November 2019. Mr X asked the Council for compensation for stress, to rehouse him or offer a compulsory purchase order on his property and to improve the drainage in the area.
6. The Council provided a response in November explaining that compensation and compulsory purchase orders were not available in the circumstances of flooding. The letter outlined the steps the Council had taken to reduce the risk of flooding in the area. The Council’s response directed Mr X to the second stage of its complaints procedure.
7. Mr X raised a stage 2 complaint with the Council in December 2019 following a further incident of flooding on the road. Mr X asked who had responsibility for managing health and safety during and after flooding.
8. The Council replied to Mr X in December 2019 and provided the information Mr X asked for and directed Mr X to the third stage complaint procedure.
9. Mr X did not raise a further complaint with the Council and complained to us in January 2021. Mr X would like an inquiry into the new flood prevention measures, a compulsory purchase order for his property, compensation and MP involvement in the matter.
10. The restriction outlined in paragraph 2 applied because Mr X complained about a matter he became aware of more than 12 months ago. We have discretion to disapply this rule where we decide there are good reasons. In this case I decided not to exercise discretion because Mr X did not provide any good reasons why he did not complain to us within 12 months. It was reasonable to expect Mr X to have complained sooner.
11. The restriction outlined in paragraph 3 applied as we could not achieve the outcomes Mr X was seeking through an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the complaint was late and there were no good reasons to exercise discretion to accept it now. An investigation could not achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman