Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delays in responding to requests to prune back trees and delays in responding to complaints. We do not consider the complainant has suffered a significant personal injustice. Also, we consider the Council’s explanation and apology for the delays in responding to the complainant is a suitable remedy to this part of the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council:
• delayed in cutting back branches which were blocking the entrance to her garden
• left branches which fell during the tree work
• discussed her complaint with her neighbour without her consent
• failed to respond to her correspondence; and
• has a disjointed and exhausting complaints procedure.

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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

3. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council apologises for the delay in responding to Mrs X’s complaint. It says this was because a new complaint system was introduced during Mrs X’s complaint and her repeated requests to escalate her complaint were missed.
7. I understand Mrs X found pursuing her complaint difficult and tiring. However, the Council has apologised and explained why the delay occurred. I consider this an appropriate remedy to this part of the complaint.
8. The Council has inspected the trees and Mrs X confirms the trees have been cut back. I understand she is concerned what will happen when they grow back. However, it will be open to her to contact the Council if she experiences problems with overgrowing Council trees in the future.
9. Mrs X also complains the Council discussed her complaint with her neighbour. The Council denies this. If Mrs X believes the Council has breached her data protection, it is reasonable for her to contact the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) on this point.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because:
• we do not consider she has suffered a significant personal injustice that warrants our involvement;
• the Council has apologised for the delays in responding to her complaint which is a suitable remedy to this part of her complaint; and
• it is reasonable to expect Mrs X to raise her data protection concerns with the ICO.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman