Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to the complainant’s concerns about nuisance and damage caused by a tree. This is because we cannot achieve the outcome he is seeking.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr X, complains that the Council was at fault in its response to his concerns about nuisance and damage caused by a tree.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X says a tree adjacent to his property causes nuisance. He says sap and root growth have damaged his property and the tree causes a loss of light. He brought his concerns to the Council’s attention in August 2022 and complains about its response. In settlement of the matter, Mr X wants the Council to remove the tree.
6. The evidence shows that, in response to Mr X’s concerns, the Council has inspected the tree. Its officers have found that it is healthy and pruning works are not warranted under its tree management protocol. It has accepted that it delayed setting out its findings in writing and has apologised for that failing. It has advised Mr X of his common law right to prune overhanging branches.
7. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we cannot achieve the outcome he is seeking. The Council has set out why it does not regard pruning as warranted. That is a decision for its tree officers to make and there is no evidence of fault in the way they did so. That being the case, the Ombudsman cannot question their professional judgement, or intervene to substitute an alternative view.
8. The correspondence shows that Mr X believes the tree has caused damage to his property. This is, effectively, an allegation that the Council has been negligent in allowing the tree to cause the damage and that it is therefore liable for it. These are matters which the Ombudsman cannot determine. Ultimately, they are for the courts.
9. Mr X alleges the Council failed to inform him of his legal rights. I can see no evidence to support this allegation. But, if Mr X believes he has rights which he has not exercised, it is open to him to do so. If he believes the Council has breached his legal rights, his recourse is to take the matter to court.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we cannot achieve the outcome he is seeking.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman