Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an overgrown tree next to the complainant’s property. The Council has proposed action which is a satisfactory way to address the matter, and it is reasonable to expect the complainant to pursue a court remedy for any damage to his property.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council needs to cut back an overgrown tree next to his property. He says it is causing damage to the external structure of his house, which could result in masonry falling onto his kitchen roof or pedestrians.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We can 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. So, we do not start an investigation if we decide:

• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation, or
• we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6) & (7), as amended, section 34(B))

4. The law also says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council, which included an update on when works will be done to the tree.
6. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. In response to our enquiries, the Council has confirmed works to pollard the tree will take place in October 2024. This is a satisfactory way to address Mr X’s complaint, and an investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to achieve anything more for him.
8. In particular, if Mr X believes the Council is liable for any damage to his property, we would normally expect him to seek a remedy in the courts, either directly or through his insurers. This is because we cannot decide whether an organisation has been negligent, and have no powers to enforce an award of damages. I see no exceptional reasons why Mr X should not be expected to pursue a court remedy for any damage to his property.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council has already proposed action which is a satisfactory way to address the matter, and it is reasonable to expect him to pursue a court remedy for any damage to his property.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman