Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an alledged failure by the Council to respond to and address drainage concerns it has received in respect of problems across a town in its area. The complainant says this may put homes at risk of flooding in the future. There is, however, insufficient evidence of the complainant having suffered a significant and personal injustice to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant (Mr Q) is complaining on behalf of local residents about the Council’s alledged failure to respond and address drainage concerns it has received in respect of problems across a town in its area.
2. In summary, Mr Q says the Council’s alledged fault puts homes at risk of flooding in the future. As a desired outcome, he wants the Council carry out drain surveys and communicate the state of drains and then explain what plans it has to deal with the regular flooding issues.

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 any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (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. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Before accepting a complaint, we must be satisfied that the complainant has suffered a personal and significant injustice as a result of the fault alledged. This means the complainant must demonstrate a causal link between the alledged fault and them personally suffering serious loss, harm or distress.
6. First, I note the injustice claimed is that the alledged fault by the Council may risk homes being put at risk of flooding in the future. In my view, this is a speculative injustice as it concerns what may or may not happen in the future. At this stage, it cannot be said the alledged fault has resulted in serious loss, harm or distress. It is not the role of the Ombudsman to remedy a speculative injustice. Second, it is also relevant that Mr Q is complaining on behalf of all local residents that have been affected by flooding in the past. I do not therefore consider he has suffered a direct injustice personally and in any event, some form of injustice above and beyond that suffered by the public generally. In my view, there is an insufficient injustice to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the restrictions I outline at paragraph three (above) apply.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman