Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to remove 3 trees behind his property. The Council has removed one tree and is entitled to suspend removal of the other two trees due to a planning application. It has apologised to Mr X for the handling of the case. There is no outstanding injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to remove three trees behind his property. Mr X says the Council delayed dealing with his request and having agreed to remove the trees suspended the action due to a planning application on nearby land. Mr X says the Council’s communication has been poor. He says one tree blocks early evening sun and is at risk of coming down in a storm.

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 or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered Mr X’s information, comments, and photographs. I have discussed the complaint with him by telephone. I have clarified the position with the Council and considered its replies to Mr X’s complaints.

Back to top

What I found

5. In June 2018 Mr X asked the Council to assess the trees. In January 2019 he contacted the Council again because his request had not been dealt with. In February the Council consulted with neighbours and indicated it was willing to remove the trees. However, in March it decided to postpone removal of the trees due to a planning application for a housing development on the land behind the trees. It says there are issues including screening along the boundary. Mr X does not accept this reasoning. He says there are trees behind the three he wants removed.
6. The Council’s complaint replies to Mr X says on 18 July it inspected the trees a second time and referred one to its contractor to remove due to its condition. However, Mr X tells me this has not happened. The Council says it suspended removal of the trees due to the application to develop the fields and habitat implications.
7. Mr X feels badly treated by the Council. He says the Council has given different reasons for not removing the trees and allowed trees to be removed elsewhere during what it says is a restricted cutting period due to nesting.
8. The Council’s complaint replies apologise to Mr X for the delays and inadequate communication. This includes not informing Mr X of a decision to consult more widely on the removal of the trees. Following a contact from this office the Council, early in December, removed the tree identified as being unhealthy.

Analysis

9. I will not investigate this complaint for the following reasons:
10. Investigation will not achieve the result Mr X wants. The Council has considered the position and is entitled to postpone removal of the remaining two trees due to the proximity of the proposed housing development. There is no administrative fault. The Council has explained the planning application will consider ecology, landscape/habitat, trees and visual impact and it does not want to remove the trees until this is done. The Council tells me it hopes the planning application will come to planning committee in February. Any delay in this matter does not cause Mr X injustice and does not need investigating.
11. The Council has recently removed the tree identified for removal due to its unhealthy condition. That action resolves the matter.
12. The Council has apologised to Mr X for its handling of the case and has acknowledged its delay and poor communication. No further remedy is required.
13. Events before 18 September 2019 are outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction on the 12 month rule (see paragraph 3 above). Mr X complains late about the handling of his original referral. I will not exercise discretion to investigate the earlier period because he could have complained sooner.

Back to top

Final decision

14. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to remove three trees behind his property. The Council has removed one tree and is entitled to suspend removal of the other two due to a planning application. It has apologised to Mr X for the handling of the case. There is no injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman