Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the process the Council followed when serving and subsequently confirming a Tree Preservation order. We have not seen enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation. Nor do we consider that further investigation would lead to a different outcome. Finally, we cannot require the Council to revoke the Tree Preservation Order as the complainant is seeking.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to follow statutory procedure and guidelines when serving and subsequently confirming a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) which included trees on his property.
2. Mr X wants:
• the TPO revoked
• the Council’s TPO procedures overhauled
• investigation of Officer behaviour and TPO training
• acknowledgement the request for a TPO came from false and malicious information; and
• a personal apology and detailed account of the Council’s conduct.

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 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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council decided not to confirm a provisional TPO made in 2022. It decided to serve a new provisional TPO in January 2023. It is not required to consult anyone before serving a provisional TPO. The consultation period runs after the notice is issued. Mr X objected to the new provisional TPO served in 2023.
7. The Council referred the case to its Planning Committee to decide whether to confirm the provisional TPO.
8. The Case Officer wrote a report. It included details of objections received, including those made by Mr X. The report also detailed why the Officer recommended the TPO be confirmed.
9. Mr X spoke at the Committee meeting, as did a local councillor. The minutes show the Committee debated the TPO before voting to confirm it.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because:
• There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council decided to serve a provisional TPO and then confirm it.
• We do not consider that further investigation will lead to a different outcome; and
• We cannot require the Council to revoke the TPO.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman