Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to remove branches from its trees overhanging her property. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an Ombudsman investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X lives in a house bordering wooded land owned by the Council.
2. Mrs X complains the Council will not prune branches from the trees on its land which overhang her property. Mrs X wants the Council to remove the branches at its expense.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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.

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

4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. As part of my assessment I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Mrs X;
• viewed relevant online maps;
• issued a draft decision, inviting Mrs X to reply, and considered her response.

Back to top

What I found

6. The Council prioritises work to trees causing risk to people or property, but will assess and determine each report or complaint about its trees on their own merits, and taking into account its available budget.
7. When Mrs X reported the problem with the overhanging branches to the Council, it sent an officer to visit. The officer decided the Council should not remove any of the overhanging branches because, in his judgement, none of them were at risk of causing damage to people or property. The Council took the view that it was for Mrs X to remove the branches, as she is entitled to lop overhanging vegetation owned by neighbours on adjacent land, including from Council-owned land.
8. Mrs X says the Council should remove the overhanging branches and asked the Council to use the discretion within its policy to do the work to the trees next to her garden. She says the Council has done similar work in the past. She considers the Council should make an exception here because of the large amount of work involved.
9. The Ombudsman could only criticise the Council officers’ professional judgement here if there has been fault in the way they made their decision which could have changed the outcome. An officer visited the site to assess the trees, to make a properly informed decision. When Mrs X asked the Council to use its discretion to do the work, officers considered her request. But they explained the Council must focus its limited resources on situations where there is a safety issue or the likelihood of damage to property.
10. Any discretionary work the Council previously did on branches overhanging the land Mrs X now owns does not mean it is required to repeat it. The Council may have done that work because it had available tree management funds at that time, or because officers determined the overhanging branches caused risk to people or property. I have not seen evidence of Council fault in its decisions on when and where to use its staff and funding in line with its policy.
11. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in its decision-making processes to justify an Ombudsman investigation. I realise Mrs X disagrees with the Council’s decisions not to do the work, and then not to make a discretionary decision to diverge from its adopted policy. But it is not fault for a council to properly make decisions with which someone disagrees.

Back to top

Final decision

12. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an Ombudsman investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman