Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about a tree outside her property. It is unlikely we would find fault.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council:
• removed the trunk and branches of a tree outside her property but has left a large stump and the roots;
• has not paid for the costs of damage to her property; and
• has failed to repair the damage caused by the tree to the pavement outside her property.
2. Ms X said that as a result she has incurred financial costs as well as frustration and unnecessary time and trouble.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)

We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Ms X has been complaining about the tree outside her property since around 2015. Following complaints in 2022, the Council cut the tree down, leaving the stump and root system.
8. The evidence Ms X has provided shows the Council has inspected the tree and carried out what it considers to be appropriate work. Ms X believes this is insufficient and the Council should remove the stump and roots.
9. It is not for the Ombudsman to express a view on whether the tree should be removed. Rather, it is to consider whether there is fault in the way the Council considered the matter. There is no evidence of such fault. That being the case, we cannot criticise the Council’s position or intervene to substitute an alternative view.
10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint the roots have damaged the water pipes causing her additional water charges. The injustice she claims is too speculative for us to remedy.
11. Residents who are affected by trees on council or other neighbouring land can make a claim under negligence for any damage or loss they have suffered. These are civil matters and can only be determined by insurers or, where liability is denied, by the courts.
12. It is reasonable for Mrs X to submit a claim and take court action if the Council declines liability. For the reasons explained in paragraph 3 we will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint.
13. Ms X is unhappy the Council has not repaired the pavement. The pavement outside Mx X’s home is part of the highway. So, if Ms X believes the Council has failed to properly maintain the pavement, she may take her complaint to court, as explained in paragraph 3. This is because the Court has powers to require the Council to carry out repairs. We do not have the powers to do so. It would then be for the Court to decide what repairs, if any, the Council should do and set a timescale for the work.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman