Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to make reasonable adjustments to help the complainant resolve issues caused by a tall tree at a neighbouring property. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Tree & Woodland department responded, and any concerns about the involvement of the Adult Social Care team are premature, as they have not been considered under the Council’s complaints procedure.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has failed to provide reasonable adjustments to help him resolve his concerns about a tall tree at a neighbouring property. Mr X says the tree has a significant impact on the use if his own property, which seriously affects his mental health and recovery from a brain injury.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. The law also says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the Council knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the Council of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The reasonable adjustment duty is set out in the Equality Act 2010 and applies to any body which carries out a public function. It aims to make sure that a person with a disability can use a service as close as it is reasonably possible to get to the standard usually offered to a person who does not have a disability.
7. But the making of a reasonable adjustment would not extend to the Council’s Tree & Woodland department acting on Mr X’s behalf to contact the owner of the neighbouring land. Furthermore, the Council has explained the ‘high hedges’ legislation is not applicable to the trees in question, so it has no power to have them pruned/removed. In addition, the tree management policy which Mr X highlights in his complaint is only relevant to Council-owned trees so is not relevant in this case. Overall, I consider there is insufficient evidence of fault in the response by the Tree & Woodland department to justify investigating this part of the complaint.
8. We have not investigated any concerns Mr X may have about lack of support from the Council’s Adult Social Care team, as the Council has confirmed this aspect has not been considered through its complaints process. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to pursue a new complaint with the Council about this issue, and he can then refer the matter to the Ombudsman once he has received the Council’s final response.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council’s Tree & Woodland department has responded to his concerns, and he can raise a new complaint with the Council about the related actions of its Adult Social Care team.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman