Summary: We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint that the Council is at fault in refusing to remove a tree close to her property. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault on the Council’s part.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Ms B, complains that the Council is at fault in refusing to remove a tree close to her property.

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 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 have considered what Ms B has said in support of her complaint and the documents and photographs she has provided. I have also considered the Council’s complaint responses and the relevant policy documents. I have offered Ms B the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Ms B’s complaint concerns a Council-owned tree adjacent to her property. Ms B says the tree is too tall and too close to her home. She believes it will cause damage in the future, and that its roots may have done so already. She believes the Council should remove the tree.
5. The evidence shows that the Council inspected the tree in 2019 and 2020. It has concluded that the tree is healthy and does not pose a safety risk. That being the case, it has decided that removal of the tree is not warranted. Ms B disagrees with the Council’s conclusions and wants it to reconsider the matter.
6. We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault on the Council’s part. It is not for the Ombudsman to take a view on whether the tree should be removed. That is a matter for the professional judgement of the Council’s arboriculture officers. The question for us is whether the Council made the decision in the right way, not the merits of the decision itself.
7. I have considered the relevant Council policy documents and it appears that the Council has made a defensible decision under the policies. Ms B disagrees with that decision, but that does not mean it was made with fault. Without evidence of fault, we cannot intervene to criticise the Council’s position or to substitute an alternative view.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault on the Council’s part.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman