Trees archive 2021-2022


Archive has 184 results

  • London Borough of Bromley (21 006 673)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trees 07-Sep-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council will not pay the complainant the full cost of replacing his garden wall. This is because we cannot decide what the Council should pay towards the repairs. Where the amount is disputed, the matter is for the courts to decide. It is therefore reasonable to expect the complainant to go to court to resolve the matter.

  • Bristol City Council (21 005 493)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trees 07-Sep-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s alleged failure to maintain some trees. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation. The complaint is also late and there no good reasons to exercise our discretion to investigate now, and any question of harm or damage from neighbouring trees is properly for a court of law to decide.

  • Hampshire County Council (21 007 581)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trees 03-Sep-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council damaged his garage by planting trees close to the boundary of his property. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his claim against the Council by taking the Council to court.

  • East Hertfordshire District Council (21 003 534)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trees 31-Aug-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with the complainant’s concerns about planning matters and damage to their property. The law says we should not look at the substantive issues. It is not a good use of public funds to investigate how the Council dealt the complainant’s concerns about those issues.

  • London Borough of Ealing (20 009 317)

    Statement Not upheld Trees 26-Aug-2021

    Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s failure to address her concerns after it approved applications relating a tree in her garden and a flat in the building that she lives in. We ended our investigation as it was unlikely to result in a finding of fault or an injustice we could remedy.

  • Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (21 007 304)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trees 20-Aug-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about maintenance of Council trees on Mr X’s boundary. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions which would warrant an investigation. It is reasonable for Mr X to submit a claim for any damages to the Council’s insurers or the courts if no liability is accepted for any damages.

  • North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council (21 005 013)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trees 20-Aug-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to remove a tree from land near the complainant’s home. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

  • Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council (20 011 892)

    Statement Not upheld Trees 20-Aug-2021

    Summary: Mrs C complained the Council failed to protect a tree subject to a Tree Protection Order and take enough action against her neighbour for unlawful works to the tree. As a result, she said she experienced distress due to the irreparable harm to the tree. We found the Council properly considered Mrs C’s concerns and followed its policy. It reached a decision it was entitled to reach; we cannot therefore criticise the merits of its decision.

  • Bristol City Council (20 005 721)

    Statement Not upheld Trees 19-Aug-2021

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s inadequate investigation and unreasonable decision not to take enforcement action against works affecting a protected tree. We found no fault in how the Council reached its decision.

  • Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council (20 008 116)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Trees 19-Aug-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to Mr Y’s report of a fallen tree, which caused damage to his property. This is because the Council’s insurers or the courts are better placed than us to consider the matter.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings