Summary: Mr B experienced no significant injustice from the Council taking three months to cut overgrown trees near his home. However, the Council failed to answer much of his correspondence, and failed to answer his complaint in line with its corporate procedure. It has agreed to apologise, and to arrange staff training.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr B, complains that the Council failed to cut overgrown trees on a highway near his home when it said it would. He said it took around three months for the Council to cut the trees. He says the Council failed to respond to his emails about this, and, when he complained, told him he had to follow the matter up with the contractor himself.

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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information from Mr B and the Council. Both parties had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened?

5. The Council’s website says it carries out maintenance to trees located on Council-run highways and open spaces. It says it may do this if a tree is causing an obstruction to a highway, public right of way or a footpath.
6. The Council’s corporate complaints policy says its aim is to resolve as many complaints as possible at stage 1. It says, “responses must be open and honest, admitting fault when things have gone wrong and setting out a package of measures to put things right”.
7. The policy says that, if a council service has been provided by a contractor, they may be required to reply to a complaint at stage 1.
8. The policy also says that if someone is dissatisfied with the outcome of a stage 1 complaint, the Council will arrange a stage 2 review by a senior manager (if the complainant requests it). All complaint responses should include information on the right to escalate the complaint.

What happened?

9. Mr B emailed the Council in July 2020 to complain about overgrown trees on a road near his house. He walked along the footpath on his way to and from the nearby tube station during his commute to work.
10. The Council told Mr B that it would cut the trees in the following few weeks.
11. Mr B contacted the Council in late July, August and early September, asking for an update – as the trees remained uncut. It does not appear the Council answered any of these emails.
12. Mr B complained about the delay and about the Council’s failure to respond to his emails. The Council responded in September. It said it had passed the matter to a contractor, and therefore any delay was the contractor’s fault, not the Council’s. It said it would send Mr B the details of the contractor if he wished.
13. Mr B replied by email, saying it was the Council’s responsibility to follow the matter up with the contractor, not his. However, it does not appear the Council answered this email.
14. Mr B says the trees have since been cut.

My findings

15. Mr B did not suffer a significant injustice from the Council taking three months to cut back the overgrown trees he reported, so I do not intend to make a finding on whether this constituted a delay.
16. However, there were several problems with how the Council dealt with Mr B’s correspondence and complaint.
17. Firstly, the Council did not answer Mr B’s emails between July and September.
18. Then, in responding to his complaint, it suggested he chase the matter up with the contractor himself.
19. If the responsibility for doing something lies with the Council – as, according to its website, it does in this case – then the Council remains responsible, even if it asks a private contractor to do the job on its behalf.
20. This means that, in order to find out what was going on with the planned works, the Council should have asked the contractor itself – or, in accordance with its complaint policy, it could have asked the contractor to respond directly to Mr B. It did not do either of these things.
21. The Council’s response also failed to address half of Mr B’s complaint (about communication issues), and failed to tell Mr B how to escalate the complaint. This does not meet the standard of complaint response required by the Council’s policy.
22. Although Mr B was clearly dissatisfied with the Council’s response, and sent an email about this, the Council did not answer this email. And it did not ask a senior manager to review the complaint, as is set out in its policy.
23. Because of the above, I have found fault with the Council’s communication and complaint-handling in Mr B’s case.

Back to top

Agreed actions

24. The Council has agreed to apologise to Mr B for its failure to answer his emails about overgrown trees, and for the way it handled his complaint.
25. The Council has also agreed to ensure that officers who are required to respond to corporate complaints are up to date with training on the Council’s policy.
26. The Council has agreed to complete these actions within two months of the date of this decision statement.

Back to top

Final decision

27. Mr B experienced no significant injustice from the Council taking three months to cut overgrown trees near his home. However, the Council failed to answer much of his correspondence, and failed to answer his complaint in line with its corporate procedure. The agreed actions remedy his injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman