Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to relocate a tree it has planted on Council-maintained land in front of her property. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council has refused to relocate a tree it has planted on Council-maintained land in front of her property. She says the tree blocks natural light and is impacting on her enjoyment of her home. She also complains about poor complaints handling. She wants the Council to relocate the tree.

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 could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

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

3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council is responsible for maintaining an area of land in front of Ms X’s property. It recently replaced a tree that had died and been cut down. It could not plant the new tree in the exact same location due to the old tree stump, so planted it a suitable location close by.
7. Ms X complained that the positioning of the new tree blocked natural light into her property. She also complained the Council had not told her of its intention to re-plant and that it had failed to respond to her communication about the matter.
8. In its complaint response, the Council accepted it had delayed responding to her contacts and could have handled her complaint better. It apologised to her for this.
9. It said it had considered her request to move the tree but could not agree to it. This was because the tree was now established and it was not good practice to move established trees.
10. We will not investigate this complaint as there is insufficient evidence of fault. We cannot question a council’s decision where there is no evidence of fault in how it was reached. The Council considered Ms X’s request but decided it could not agree to move the tree. It explained its reasons to Ms X. This is what we would expect. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.
11. The Council has accepted some fault in its communications and complaints handling and apologised to Ms X for this. This is an appropriate remedy for any distress caused.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman