I think the idea that a wet winter will be balanced out by a dry summer sounds dangerously close to believing in the "law of averages".
The global weather systems clearly do have negative feedbacks which "balance out". Otherwise certain areas of the planet would at some stage have become permanently icebound, for instance. But there are so many factors influencing the weather, via so many complex interactions, that some of these negative feedbacks can take millions of years to "balance out", never mind 12 months (e.g. look at how many interglacials our current ice age has experienced over millions of years, yet we are still stuck in it, with ice covering both Poles).
To demonstrate the fallacy of the law of averages, toss a coin half a dozen times. If you got a sequence of heads tails heads tails heads tails, that would feel perfectly normal, while a sequence of 6 heads or 6 tails in a row would give rise to suspicions of the coin having been rigged. Yet the chance of HTHTHT is exactly the same as HHHHHH or TTTTTT. You need a lot more evidence before you could start believing there might be a problem with the coin.
And I think this is relevant when considering our current winter. Suddenly getting three wet months in a row in one UK winter doesn't suggest to me that our climate has changed. If the same thing happened every year for the next decade, I'd be interested, but until then it's just weather as far as I can see.
2 miles west of Taunton, 32 m asl, where "milder air moving in from the west" becomes SNOWMAGEDDON.
Well, two or three times a decade it does, anyway.