Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a developer of land allegedly felling trees on Council owned land. This is because there are bodies better placed to in investigate and remedy the issues subject to the complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant (Mr X) complains the Council failed to control the actions of a private company (a land developer) which allegedly felled a number of trees on a trees on its land without authorisation. He says the Council failed to ensure that a felling licence was obtained for works carried out on its land and that it did not keep records to prove there was an exemption to this requirement.
2. In summary, Mr X says the loss of local woodland and harm to its natural habitat has been very distressing. As a desired outcome, he wants the Council to restock and extend the woodland area affected. Mr X also wants the Council to terminate its relationship with the private company which he says is under criminal investigation for its actions.

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
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained; or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement; or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation; or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(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 the complainant and the Council. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council says the private entity concerned is a land developer and that it granted the developer licenced access to the land as a potential buyer. The Councils adds the terms and conditions of the licence permitted the developer to carry out initial some works, though required it to identify and ensure that it had in place, prior to their commencement, all necessary statutory or third-party consents. The Council says that once it became aware the developer was carrying out activities on the land beyond its expectations, it requested all works cease. It says the developer complied with this request.
6. In response to Mr X’s complaint, the Council says relevant statutory authorities are investigating and considering the circumstances in which trees were removed by the developer and as such it would be inappropriate for it to comment any further at this time. I also recognise that Mr X says there is an ongoing criminal investigation into the developer’s actions by the Forestry Commission. In my view, any fault and injustice in this case is pending investigation by other better placed authorities. I am exercising my discretion to not investigate on this basis.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there are bodies better placed to in investigate and remedy the issues subject to the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman