Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint the Council will not grant permission for him to reduce the height of trees on highway land behind his property. Further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault with the way the Council has made its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr B, says the trees behind his property are too large and they block light from his garden and are a potential hazard. Mr B has asked the Council for permission to reduce the height of the trees and the Council has refused.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. 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:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information Mr B provided and the complaint correspondence between Mr B and the Council. I sent a draft decision to Mr B and invited comments before I made my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. While Mr B disagrees with the Council’s decision, the Ombudsman cannot say whether the Council should grant permission for Mr B to carry out the work to the trees. The Ombudsman can only criticise the Council if its decision to refuse permission was affected by fault. Further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault because:
• The trees are owned by the Council and the information it publishes on its website says it is unlikely to take any action if a tree is shading a property
• A specialist surveyor last inspected the trees in June 2019 and decided there were no defects or safety concerns with the trees that required action. The Council has sent a detailed response to Mr B explaining this and how it will monitor the ash trees where ash dieback disease is a concern
• The Council has confirmed Mr B has rights under common law to cut the branches back to his boundary and he can carry out this work. But it will not approve works to reduce the overall height of the tree because this will lead to faster growth and increased maintenance in the future.

Back to top

Final decision

6. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because further consideration of the complaint is unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman