Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the time the Council took to deal with a damaged tree. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains about the time it took the Council to deal with a storm damaged tree. He also complains of poor communication and an absence of updates. Mr X wants compensation and for the Council to review how it communicates with people.

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 an investigation if we believe the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I read the complaint and the Council’s response. I considered comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

4. A tree close to Mr X’s home was damaged during a storm in February. The Council made the tree safe on the same day. It received 150 reports of damaged trees after the storm. A few days later there was another storm which caused further disruption.
5. In early April the Council told Mr X it would remove the tree stump as soon as possible but, due to lockdown, it was only doing essential work.
6. After Mr X chased the Council, and involved his local councillor, the Council removed a trip hazard (raised paving stone) near the stump. Mr X complained in June because the Council had not removed the tree stump. He asked the Council to deal with the stump so a new tree could grow or to plant a new tree. He asked for compensation and an apology for the time taken to resolve what should have been a simple issue.
7. The Council removed the stump in June and later reinstated the highway. In response to his complaint it explained the tree could not re-grow but it would consider planting a new tree. The Council explained a new tree might not be in the same location. The Council apologised for the delay in dealing with the tree but explained this was due to a combination of the large amount of damage caused by the storms and because lockdown meant staff could only deal with work which was essential to public safety. Once lockdown eased the Council was able to deal with the routine work which had built up. The Council declined Mr X’s request for compensation.

Assessment

8. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of injustice. I appreciate it took a long time for the Council to do all the remedial work to the tree but it has explained why it took time and the delays were largely due to events it could not control. Possibly the Council could have provided Mr X with updates but it had told Mr X in April that it was only doing essential work due to COVID-19. I appreciate the delay, and lack of information, was frustrating and Mr X spent time chasing the Council. However Mr X has not suffered a financial loss and the time he spent pursuing the Council does not represent an injustice which requires compensation or an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

9. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman