Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to approve a suitable drainage system in line with building regulations. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to ensure a developer installed a drainage system on a development site in line with approved plans, causing surface water flooding onto his wife’s, Mrs X’s property.
2. He wants the Council to take enforcement action against the developer to ensure a suitable draining system is installed and apologise it approved a system which he said is not in line with building regulations. He further wants the Council to provide compensation for the avoidable distress caused.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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, or
• any fault has not caused a significant enough injustice to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council approved the development several years ago. It published the planning permission online. The planning permission was subject to several conditions, including one specifically for drainage.
8. Mr X complained to the Council about the drainage system installed, stating it was not suitable for the area. The Council responded by informing him the Developer had submitted plans to meet the drainage condition. However, the Council found the proposed system was unsuitable. The Council added the Developer proposed an alternative system, which it approved. It said the Developer had installed that system. The Council concluded the Developer had installed the drainage system in line with the planning conditions.
9. Following an investigation, the Council was satisfied the Developer has installed the approved drainage system on-site. It concluded there was no breach of planning permission and no need for the Council to take enforcement action. There is not enough evidence of fault in its decision not to take enforcement action to justify our involvement.
10. Mr X said the only drainage system available on the Council’s website is the original one, not the approved and installed scheme referenced by the Council. The Council’s failure to publish this information caused avoidable uncertainty for Mr X. However, given the Council informed Mr X during the complaint process the Developer did not install the system Mr X believed it to be, any remaining uncertainty is not a significant enough injustice to justify investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman