Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to determine a tree preservation order works application in 2020. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Mr X could not have complained to us sooner.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to determine his application for works to a preserved tree next to his home which he says was causing structural problems. He applied in 2020 and it was not until 2023 when the Council assessed new information and gave approval to fell the tree. He says his home has suffered further damage in the intervening years and the Council should compensate him for repair work he could have avoided.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X applied to the Council in 2020 to carry out work to a tree protected by a preservation order which was causing root damage to his property. He says he did not receive any decision on the application and little information in response to his agent’s enquiries. In 2021 the Council told his agent the Covid-19 pandemic was a reason for delays in decisions, but it was not until July 2023 when he provided further details that the Council finally approved the application.
7. Mr X says that during this time the roots caused further damage and that works he had to carry out to mitigate this would have been unnecessary if he had received a decision in 2020. He has submitted a claim against the Council for the additional work he carried out but this has been rejected.

Finding

8. Mr X submitted the application with his agent in October 2020. He did not receive a decision within the statutory 8 weeks period but he did not bring this to our attention until May 2024. This is outside the normal 12-month period for accepting complaints.
9. The time for receiving complaints is from when someone became aware of the matter they wish to complain about, not when they complained to the Council or it issued its final response. We would expect someone to complain to us within a year, even if they were dissatisfied with the time the complaints procedure was taking.
10. We have some discretion to consider older complaints but in this case it was reasonable for Mr X to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate after the 8-week period for determination had expired. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the Secretary of State and can issue decisions on applications where a council has failed to determine them within the statutory period.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to determine a tree preservation order works application in 2020. This complaint was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Mr X could not have complained to us sooner.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman