The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: The Council was at fault for the time taken to resolve Mr X’s concerns about a drain flooding and causing damage to his property. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X for the time taken to resolve the issue and pay him £200 for the frustration and inconvenience caused.
The complaint
Mr X complains about the time taken by the Council to resolve drainage issues outside of his property. As a result, Mr X’s property has been damaged by flooding caused by blockages of the drain.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended) If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
As part of this investigation, I considered the information provided by Mr X and the Council. I discussed the complaint with Mr X over the telephone. I made enquires with the Council and considered the information received in response. I sent a draft of this decision to Mr X and the Council for comments.
What I found
The highways authority is responsible for maintaining a highway that is maintainable at the public expense. (Highways Act 1980, section 41) The highways authority, for the purpose of draining or preventing surface water from flowing on to the highway has the power to a) construct or lay, in the highway or land adjoining near to it, such drains as they consider necessary; and b) scour, cleanse, and keep open all drains situated in the highway or land adjoining or laying near it. (Highways Act 1980, section 100) The highways authority is responsible for drainage gullies into the sewer system which is managed and maintained by the area water board.
What happened Mr X lives in a property on a main road. There is a drain outside of his property which floods. This is causing water to collect against the side of Mr X’s property and has damaged the internal walls and floor.
In March 2021, Mr X contacted the Council to report the flooding outside of his property. The Council inspected the site and noted a defect had already been raised for the site.
In June 2021, Mr X made further reports about flooding from the drain outside of his property. The Council sent its emergency response team to the site who provided sandbags and placed these up against Mr X’s property.
In September 2021 and October 2021 Mr X made further reports about the drain flooding. The Council inspected the site in October 2021 and November 2021. In November 2021 the Council raised the matter as a defect.
Mr X contacted the Council again in January 2022. He said the Council put in place a quick fix solution in June 2021 by putting down sandbags but since this time there has not been a longer term resolution. Mr X said his property was still affected by flooding from the drain. On 20 January 2022, the Council responded to Mr X and said the drain was on the list to carry out jetting and this should happen within four weeks. The Council also raised the matter with the cyclical team.
The Council jetted the drain in early February 2022 and found there was broken pipework connecting it to the main drain which would need repaired or replaced. The Council’s cyclical engineer updated the customer service team that further investigation works were needed to the pipe and gullies north of Mr X’s property. Once these were completed the matter would be passed to the engineering team to complete the necessary works. The Council updated Mr X on 17 February 2022. The Council also told him the highways cyclical engineer was first made aware of the issues with the drain in January 2022, however the highways team would now be able to take action to resolve the drain issues.
On 22 February 2022, Mr X complained to the Council. Mr X said the issues with the drain had not been fixed and he had no idea how long this would take. Mr X asked the Council to provide a timeframe.
The Council completed its investigations of the drain on 24 February 2022. The highways team told the customer service team it would raise the works as a priority to resolve the flooding issues, but the Council did need to obtain utility apparatus plans for the area before carrying out any works and this could take four weeks.
The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint on 25 February 2022. The Council said: Mr X initially made an enquiry about the drain in June 2021 and the emergency response team attended and placed sandbags outside his property. The Council said this matter was specifically brought to the attention of the cyclical engineering team and they provided further information in January 2022. The Council said there are high volumes of drainage issues throughout the county which impacted on investigation works.
In October 2021 Mr X logged a defect with the Council and this was inspected in November 2021. The inspector advised there was no standing water at the time although a defect was raised, but this was considered a low priority as part of the highways prioritisation works. The Council said it was not until the jetting crew flushed out the pipes in February 2022 that it became apparent there was a broken connection to the main drainage which ran under the footway.
It completed the investigation works and sent these to its engineers to raise a job as a priority to resolve the flooding issues. However, as these works required highways to dig below the highway surface they had to obtain the relevant utilities information before starting work which could take up to four weeks to obtain.
In April 2022, Mr X asked to escalate his complaint. Mr X said he initially raised concerns about the drain in March 2021, not June 2021. Mr X asked why his concerns were only raised with the cyclical team in January 2022 and not earlier. As a result, Mr X said teams were not communicating with each other and this delayed action to fix the drain as the Council took no action to fix it. Mr X asked the Council to provide a timeframe for fixing the drain. He explained his property has suffered water damage as a result of the flooding from the drain.
On 13 April 2022, the highways team updated the customer service team and said it had completed the investigations into the pipework. The highways team said the broken pipework and the ditch outfall needed to be cleared so the system could run correctly.
On 4 May 2022, the Council provided its final response to Mr X’s complaint. The Council said: The highways cyclical team completed the investigations into the drainage and advised there are further works needed to fix the issues with the broken or damaged pipework. The Council’s engineering team would carry out the works, but to complete these the road needed to be closed and the relevant utilities information obtained so nearby utilities services were not damaged. The Council said it could not provide a timeframe for the works due to the road closure needed.
It reviewed its system and acknowledged Mr X raised an enquiry in March 2021, but this was recorded as a non-urgent defect. In June 2021 after the emergency response team attended and put down sandbags the Council raised the matter as a low priority defect.
The highways cyclical team were made aware of Mr X’s initial complaint form in January 2022. The drains were jetted in February 2022 and at this point it was found there was broken pipework connection to the main drain.
Mr X remained dissatisfied and complained to the Ombudsman. In response to my enquiries the Council confirmed that the works are programmed for 7 November to 25 November 2022.
In response to the draft of this decision, the Council explained there are demands placed on it as a local authority and this report was one of many highway reports the Council had to investigate and determine a prioritised course of action.
Analysis The Council’s records show Mr X reported the flooding from the drain in March 2021. Following on from this Mr X reported the matter again in June 2021 and the Council put in place sandbags to reduce the impact of the flooding from the drain. Mr X continued to report the matter to the Council, however it was not until February 2022 that the Council jetted the drains and found there was broken pipework. In addition, it is not clear why the matter was not reported to the Council’s cyclical highways team earlier than January 2022. This was fault.
It is not clear why it took the Council so long to establish what the issues were with the drain. However, Mr X made further reports from August 2021 to February 2022, complaining about the condition of the drain and the damage it was causing internally to his property.
From the end of February 2022, the Council completed its investigations of the drain and pipework and knew what works it needed to complete to resolve the issue. However, Mr X had to wait a considerable amount of time for the Council to schedule these works for November 2022. This was fault.
Internal emails from the Council highways and customer service teams show the Council considered these works a priority. While I recognise the Council may have had many other highways repairs to carry out, and for this particular job needed to organise a road closure, I still consider it took too long to schedule the works to the drain.
As I have found fault I need to consider what injustice this caused Mr X. Mr X reports water seeps through the wall when the drain floods and as a result he cannot re-decorate the damaged areas of his property until the drain is fixed and flooding stopped. In addition, Mr X spent time and trouble pursuing this. The records show he contacted the Council many times through 2021 and 2022 to raise concerns about the flooding and damaged drain.
Agreed action
Within one month of my final decision, the Council agreed to carry out the following and provide evidence to the Ombudsman it has done so: Apologise to Mr X for the time taken to schedule to works to fix the drain and flooding.
Pay Mr X £200 for the frustration and inconvenience caused. This also accounts for the time and trouble Mr X spent in raising his concerns and complaints.
Final decision
I have completed my investigation and found the Council at fault for the time taken to resolve Mr X’s concerns about a drain. This caused Mr X injustice. The Council has agreed to the above actions to remedy the injustice caused.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman