Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council dealt with applications to fell trees on land close to the complainant’s home. We have seen no evidence of fault in the way the Council dealt with the matter.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Mr D, complains the Council refuses to explain why it has allowed protected trees to be cut down without permits from the Forestry Commission.
2. He wants the Council to uphold the Tree Preservation Orders which cover the area.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure,’ which we call ‘fault.’ We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice.’ We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr D and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr D complains the Council failed to tell him or his neighbours about applications to fell trees covered by Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs) on nearby properties. Therefore, he could not object to the applications. He says the Council failed to consider the impact of the felling on light pollution, wildlife, and loss of property value.
8. The Council received an application from private properties to fell a large number of Ash trees due to Ash Dieback. Its’ Tree Officer inspected the site and confirmed the presence of the disease.
9. Local Planning Authorities (in this case, the Council), must give permission to work on or fell trees subject to TPOs. Government guidance says authorities should consider displaying a site notice or notifying residents. However, there is no statutory duty for it to do so.
10. The Council recognises the landscape will change but this is not justification to refuse permission to remove dead or dying trees. The permission requires the applicants to replant replacement trees of five specific species.
11. The Forestry Commission told Mr D it had inspected the trees and decided those already cut down were exempt from a felling licence as they were in private gardens. The remaining trees showed signs of Ash Dieback and may also qualify for a licence exemption. The Forestry Commission confirmed it would advise the contractor and landowners if licences were required.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr D’s complaint because we have not seen evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the applications to fell the trees.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman