Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council not cutting back its tree in front of his property. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X lives in a property with a Council-owned tree on the road to the front. He complains the Council-owned tree has grown too big. He says branches, acorns and bird droppings are falling on to the house windows and drive every day. He wants the Council to trim the tree back, so it does not overhang his property.

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 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
• 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. We are not an appeal body. We may only criticise a council’s decision where there is evidence of fault in its decision-making process and but for that fault officers would have made a different decision. So we consider the processes councils have followed to make their decisions. We cannot replace a council’s decision with our own or someone else’s opinion if the decision was reached after following proper process.
6. In response to Mr X’s report about the tree, the Council sent an officer to inspect it. The officer decided the tree is not diseased, damaged or dying, or posing a significant safety risk. It is also subject to a Tree Preservation Order.
7. The Council’s policy on highway trees says:

“Our resource for highway tree maintenance is limited and our priority is to address issues with trees which are dead, diseased or dying. Any other type of highway tree maintenance is subject to resource availability and in the event that ad hoc maintenance works are raised these will be given a category of priority in accordance with our routine and reactive inspection regime.”

8. Officers gathered relevant information about the tree and applied the Council’s adopted approach when deciding not to cut back branches overhanging Mr X’s property. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process here to justify us going behind its decision and investigating.
9. Mr X wants the Council to prune the tree. We cannot require the Council to do this. The Council inspected the tree and applied its published policy.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. We have not seen evidence of fault which justifies an investigation. Also we cannot achieve the outcome he is seeking.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman