Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to prune or remove some trees which the complainant says threaten his home. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains that the Council will not remove or prune some trees adjacent to his home.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I read the complaint and the Council’s responses. I considered the Council’s tree policy. I invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Tree policy

4. The Council is responsible for maintaining street trees. It inspects trees every four years and carries out necessary maintenance. The Council only removes a tree if it is unsafe. The Council then plants a new tree in the same location. The Council does not do work on trees for reasons linked to loss of light, tree debris, bird fouling, poor TV reception, or allergies.

What happened

5. The Council owns some trees next to Mr X’s home. Mr X says the trees drop leaves into his garden and he has to pay a £35 garden waste collection charge. He says the trees promote moss on his roof and he is worried that debris from a tree will fall on a visitor and he will be prosecuted. Mr X asked the Council to prune or remove the trees.
6. In response the Council inspected the trees and found they are healthy and present no undue risk. The trees do not touch Mr X’s property, block light, obscure signs or touch wires. The Council said it removes leaves from the public highway but it is the responsibility of home owners to clear leaves from their own gardens. It explained that many councils charge to collect garden waste but, as an alternative, Mr X could compost the leaves or take them to the recycling centre. The Council said it would not prune the trees as early pruning could cause damage. It said Mr X could cut back any overhanging branches but he must not damage the tree. The Council said it had pruned the tree in the past but would not do so again until the tree needs further work.
7. Mr X is dissatisfied with the response. He objects to paying to remove leaves from a tree he does not own and he thinks he could be prosecuted if someone was injured from debris from the tree.

Assessment

8. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
9. The Council does not prune trees for reasons linked to leaf fall. Furthermore, it only removes trees if they are dangerous. The Council has inspected the trees and decided not to do any work at the moment because they are healthy and do not yet require pruning as part of its normal maintenance schedule. The Council’s decision not to prune the trees is consistent with the policy so there is no reason to start an investigation. In addition, leaf fall is natural occurrence and it is for Mr X to decide how he will maintain his garden.
10. Mr X is concerned he will be held liable if someone is injured. As the trees are healthy there is no reason to think they pose more of a risk than any other tree. In addition, as Mr X does not own the trees, and has no duty to maintain them, it is hard to see how he would be liable if there was an incident.

Back to top

Final decision

11. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman