Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of the complainant’s tree works application. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to have used her right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate to challenge the Council’s decision, and any injustice arising from the other alleged faults is not significant enough to justify the Ombudsman pursuing them further.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mrs X, says the Council failed to properly handle her application for tree works. In particular, she says the Council:
• Failed to acknowledge and respond to her communications;
• Failed to place important supporting information in the public domain;
• Misled her by suggesting the application would be determined by the Planning Committee;
• Failed to give proper reasons for its decision; and,
• Failed to give advice on who would be liable in the event of her tree causing injury or damage.
2. Mrs X thinks all stakeholders should be allowed to attend an open and publicly scrutinised meeting as originally promised.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Ombudsman investigates 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 an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• the Council has already taken satisfactory action in response to the complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6)& (7))

4. And the law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could have appealed to a government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to have appealed. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b))
5. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. The Planning Inspector can consider appeals about a decision to refuse a tree works application.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council, including their complaint correspondence.
7. I also considered our Assessment Code, and information about Mrs X’s application on the Council’s website.

Back to top

My assessment

8. As I see it, the substantive issue at the heart of Mrs X’s complaint is that part of her application for works to trees in her garden was refused. But the Ombudsman does not provide a right of appeal against such decisions, and we cannot make the Council retake its decision. Rather, it was open to Mrs X to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate if she disagreed with the Council’s decision. The Planning Inspectorate is independent and had the power to grant permission for all the proposed works. I consider it reasonable to expect Mrs X to have pursued this alternative remedy, so we will not investigate any part of the complaint about the Council’s decision on the application or how it was made.
9. Mrs X has identified other alleged administrative failings in the handling of her application, as noted in paragraph 1 above. However, and with reference to paragraph 3, where the Ombudsman has decided not to investigate the main issue(s) complained about we will not usually use public resources to consider more minor issues which have not caused the complainant a separate significant injustice. I also note the Council apologised for failing to properly explain the application might be considered under delegated powers. I am satisfied with the Council’s response to that part of the complaint.
10. Finally, it was not the Council’s role to provide Mrs X with legal advice on who would be liable if one of the trees caused an injury or damage to property.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect her to have used her right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate against the Council’s decision, and any residual injustice arising from the other alleged faults is not significant enough to justify the Ombudsman pursuing them further.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman