Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about highway repair and maintenance because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Council has failed to fully investigate a gully drain system Mr Y believes may have collapsed, causing flooding to his home. He is also unhappy with the Council response to his complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
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, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

4. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached.
7. In this case the Council has explained that it has recently flushed the gully drains in Mr Y’s area and it will inspect and flush the gullies on a cyclical basis. It has said that as part of this inspection and maintenance works it ensures gullies and drains are functioning. It said following an inspection it carried out in October 2024, there was no indication, in their professional opinion, that further work was needed on the drain near Mr Y’s home.
8. As the Council has considered the issue, carried out an inspection and, using its professional expertise and experience, from this formed a view that work does not need to be completed and further inspection is not necessary in this case, it has decided the matter properly. As there decision-making process was completed without fault, there is not enough evidence of fault in the decision itself to justify investigating, even though Mr Y may disagree with the outcome. We will not investigate.
9. Further, Mr Y has said the rainwater has led to flooding at his home. We cannot determine liability claims for negligence. These are legal claims which may only be determined by insurers or the courts. Consequently, any claim for damages, such as costs for repairs, which Mr Y considers the Council to be responsible for, are matters more appropriately dealt with by the courts. We will not investigate this complaint.
10. Mr Y has also complained about the Council’s response to his complaint. As we are not investigating the substantive issue in this complaint it is not a good use of public resources to investigate how the Council considered and responded to Mr Y’s complaint. We will not investigate this.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman