London Borough of Richmond upon Thames (23 009 087)
Category : Environment and regulation > Trees
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 09 Oct 2023
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council cutting back a hedge on the boundary of its land. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.
The complaint
- Mr X complained the Council compromised a boundary at the end of his cul de sac by cutting a hedge back poorly. He says he was not consulted about the work. Mr X says the hedge now allows people to pass through meaning the road is no longer a cul de sac. Mr X says this has caused people to walk through the road and vandalise cars.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:
- there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
- any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by Mr X.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- In response to Mr X’s complaints, the Council said the hedge was encroaching onto its land and causing a possible risk. The Council said it was within its rights to cut back the hedge. It disagrees with Mr X that the work was to a poor standard.
- As the hedge was encroaching the Council’s land, it was entitled to cut the hedge back. The law is clear on this point and so we cannot criticise the Council. The Council and Mr X disagree about the quality of the work. That is a dispute of professional judgment we will not become involved in. There is no evidence any fault by the Council has led to an increase in vandalism.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman