City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council (25 001 139)

Category : Environment and regulation > Trees

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 22 May 2025

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal of Mr X’s request to cut back protected trees. This is because it was reasonable to expect him to appeal to the Planning Inspector. And we will not separately investigate the associated complaints about delay and the quality of the Council’s customer service, as it would not be proportionate, when we are not investigating the main complaint.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complains about the Council’s refusal to allow him to cut back two protected trees. Mr X says the Council’s decision has been marked by delay and poor customer service.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)
  3. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of a government minister. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered the information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Mr X applied to the Council for permission to cut back protected trees and the Council turned down his request.
  2. Mr X also complains about delays in the Council’s response and that he had to chase the Council up for a response.
  3. We will not investigate. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr X to use his legal right to appeal to the Planning Inspector even if the appeal does not address all his complaints made to the Ombudsman.
  4. I have seen no information to indicate it would not be reasonable to expect Mr X to appeal. And, as I have already outlined, where the Ombudsman has decided not to investigate the substantive issue complained of, we will not usually use public resources to consider more minor matters such as the quality of customer service.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect him to the appeal to the Planning Inspector.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings