Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s refusal to cut back vegetation and trees on the highway boundary with her property. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council which would warrant an investigation. Only the courts can determine private property boundaries.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Miss X, complained about the Council refusing to accept responsibility for maintaining trees and vegetation on her boundary with the public highway. She says an officer originally told her the Council would cut back the growth, but his advice was later overruled. She says her home is suffering from the loss of light and her fence has been damaged by branches.

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, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered all the information which Miss X submitted with her complaint. Miss X has been given an opportunity to comment on a draft copy of my decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Miss X lives next to a highway verge which has trees and shrubs planted on the boundary with her property. She says the trees are overgrown and blocking light from her garden. The shrubs and vegetation have caused damaged to her grass and fencing.
5. Miss X reported the problem to the Council and an officer originally told her that the Council would cut back the growth because it was within the highway boundary. Subsequently a more senior officer decided that the trees and vegetation were not highway responsibility because they were on the other side of a dividing ditch.
6. The Council says this is often due to developers leaving a gap between completed property boundaries and the highway edge. The Council says it cannot use public resources to maintain private land unless the vegetation is affecting public highway users.
7. The Ombudsman has no authority to determine property boundaries and we cannot resolve the dispute between Miss X and the highway authority. Only the courts could resolve a boundary dispute between landowners.

Back to top

Final decision

8. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council which would warrant an investigation. Only the courts can determine private property boundaries.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman