Who’S Responsible For The SuDS On Badbury Park Phases 1 and 2?

Coate (Badbury Park) Residents Working Group - Compliant to Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman.

22/01/2026

Reason For Complaint

I am complaining about Swindon Borough Council’s handling of planning obligations and decision-making in relation to Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) at the Badbury Park development, Swindon, specifically Phases 1 and 2.

The Council issued a Final Section 106 (S106) Certificate covering Public Open Space (including SuDS), but now accepts it cannot retrieve the documents evidencing how compliance was assessed or approved. Despite this, the Council maintains that SuDS responsibility is secured, that residents have not been prejudiced, and that no remedy is required. The Council is unable to evidence who is legally responsible for SuDS maintenance in Phases 1 and 2, cannot confirm residents are not liable, and cannot justify why Phase 3 of the same development contains clear SuDS responsibility documentation while Phases 1 and 2 do not.

Desired Outcome

I ask the Ombudsman to consider recommending that Swindon Borough Council:

1. Formally acknowledges that SuDS responsibility for Phases 1 and 2 is not clearly evidenced

2. Provides clear written clarification of residents’ liability position

3. Considers a symbolic financial remedy for time, trouble, and distress 4. Confirms that learning outcomes are embedded (noting that new S106 processes have since been adopted)

Issue

I have experienced prolonged uncertainty about who is legally and financially responsible for SuDS maintenance at my home. The Council cannot confirm that residents are not liable, cannot identify a responsible Management Company for Phases 1 and 2, and cannot evidence how responsibility was secured. This has caused distress, loss of confidence in Council assurances, and significant time and trouble pursuing basic clarification. The uncertainty itself is the injustice, regardless of whether costs have yet crystallised.