Summary: Ms F complained the Council had failed to properly consider and act on her concerns about a Council owned tree next to her property. She said as a result she experienced distress and an ongoing safety risk. We found no fault by the Council in the way it considered Ms F’s concerns, and it correctly informed her about its responsibilities. It therefore reached decisions it was entitled to make.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms F, complained the Council has failed to properly consider and respond to her concerns about safety and nuisance issues caused by a tree close to her property. She said the failure to address the matter constitutes a safety risk to her and other residents.
2. Ms F said, as a result, she experienced frustration and the matter constitutes a safety risk to her and other residents.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Ms F and Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Ms F and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and policy

Trees

7. Councils may impose Tree Preservation Orders (TPO) to trees, groups of trees or woodland to protect them for their public amenity value. They may control works on trees, such as:
• cutting down;
• topping;
• lopping;
• uprooting; and
• wilful damage and destruction.
8. Once a TPO is in place, works cannot be carried out without written consent by the Council’s planning authority.
9. Under the Highways Act 1980, if a tree is planted on Council land, then the Council is the owner and should maintain it.

Council Policy

10. The Council’s policy for trees it owns and manages explains it relies on a programme of regular inspection to manage its trees. These inspections take place at least every three and a half years. The Council prunes the trees as necessary on instruction from its Arboricultural Officer.
11. The policy says the Council visually inspects trees to determine their general condition and health, and to identify hazards which require remedial works.
12. The Council’s policy also says that if a tree is causing damage to a private property, the person should contact their building insurer for their opinion before reporting the damage to the Council.

The Equality Act 2010

13. The Equality Act 2010 provides a legal framework to protect the rights of individuals and advance equality of opportunity for all. It offers protection, in employment, education, the provision of goods and services, housing, transport and the carrying out of public functions.
14. The Equality Act makes it unlawful for organisations carrying out public functions to discriminate on any of the nine protected characteristics listed in the Equality Act 2010. They must also have regard to the general duties aimed at eliminating discrimination under the Public Sector Equality Duty.
15. The ‘protected characteristics’ referred to in the Act are:
• age;
• disability;
• gender reassignment;
• marriage and civil partnership;
• pregnancy and maternity;
• race;
• religion or belief;
• sex; and
• sexual orientation.
16. We cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act as this can only be done by the courts. But we can make decisions about whether or not an organisation has properly taken account of an individual’s rights in its treatment of them.
17. Organisations will often be able to show they have properly taken account of the Equality Act if they have considered the impact their decisions will have on the individuals affected and these decisions can be challenged, reviewed or appealed.

What happened

18. Ms F lives in an area where there are large trees along the street owned by the Council. These are subject to Tree Protection Orders (TPO). One tree is located near the boundary between Ms F’s property and a neighbouring property. It overhangs a public footpath and part of her driveway.
19. Ms F said she moved into the area around 6 years ago. At that time, she did not have issues with the tree. However, in Summer 2025 she raised concerns to the Council about the impact the tree had on her and neighbouring residents.
20. Three weeks later, Ms F complained to the Council. She said she had not had a response to her concerns. These included:
• damage to cars from sap, bird droppings, cones and branches;
• mess on the public path, driveways and windows from leaves, branches and sap which she and other residents had to clean up regularly;
• concerns about the tree’s health due to fungi growing on the tree; and
• broader impact from the tree such as slippery surfaces and cracks in the sidewalk which was a risk to vulnerable people. She said the Council’s failure to act was discrimination and a breach of the Equality Act 2010 and its Public Sector Equality duty.
21. She also shared a report of the tree from over 25 years ago which set out recommendations she believed the Council had not followed. She asked for evidence of the tree maintenance and an immediate inspection.
22. In response the Council’s Forestry Service told Ms F her complaint did not amount to a legal nuisance. It explained the tree is on a regular cycle of inspections and was last inspected in July 2023 when remedial works were carried out. Its team had qualified professionals and were therefore not required to follow recommendations of an old report.
23. The Council inspected the tree the following week and considered the photos Ms F had shared. However, it found no concerns about the tree or any safety concerns to be addressed. It told Ms F its Forestry service is not an on-demand service for requests, so the Council’s complaint procedure does not apply. It said it would assess the tree again in 2028, but if any significant changes to the tree occurred this could be reported to the Council. It also shared information about how she could raise concerns about street cleaning to the local council and submit any claims of damage from the tree to its insurers.
24. Ms F asked the Council to escalate her complaint. She said it had failed to properly consider her concerns. She said it had only considered the tree’s health and not the impact it was causing her and other residents. She wanted the Council to arrange for environmental health to review the issues, arrange regular cleaning of the public path and her property, reduce the crown, inspect the tree more frequently, and arrange alternative dispute resolution.
25. The Council refused to consider Ms F’s complaint as a stage two complaint under its corporate complaints process. It explained this is because Ms F’s concerns were not ‘an expression of dissatisfaction about the standard of service’. It had investigated her concerns about the tree and provided its response. It subsequently informed her about her right to bring her concerns to the Ombudsman.
26. Ms F asked the Ombudsman to consider her complaint.

Analysis and findings

Responsibility for the tree

27. The Council owns the tree. It is therefore responsible for the safety and upkeep of the tree. The Council maintained the tree in regular cycles which has included inspections and crown works. It also inspected the tree after Ms F raised her concerns. It found the tree was healthy, posed no safety risks, and no other works were required.
28. I have found no fault in how the Council considered the tree. I cannot therefore criticise the merits of its decision no works to the tree was required. I also note the Council informed Ms F she could report any changes in the trees health if this should change in the future and it continues to monitor the tree.

Responsibility for debris from the tree and the public footpath

29. Owners of trees are not responsible for the debris such as leaves, sap, and twigs which naturally lands on adjoining owners’ land. This is therefore not a legal nuisance. In this case, this includes:
• Ms F’s property, which she as the owner is responsible for maintaining; and
• the public footpath and street which the Council is not responsible for as this comes under the local council’s street cleaning services responsibility.
30. In addition, Ms F said the tree may have caused damage to cars or other property. In such circumstances, Ms F has the right to make a claim to the Council’s insurers. If this is unsuccessful her claim can be brought to the attention of a court, which is the appropriate route for such disputes.
31. I have therefore found the Council correctly informed Ms F about her rights and responsibilities around the tree and debris from the tree. This is because it is not responsible for the debris from the tree on her property or the public footpath.
32. Ms F also said the tree was causing damage and cracks to the public footpath. However, the Council considered her photos and explained it had not seen evidence of cracks to the public footpath which required action from its Highways team. I found this was a decision it was entitled to make. I also note the evidence shared by Ms F is unlikely to amount to a risk to pedestrian which the Highway authority should action. However, if cracks occur or worsen, she can report this to the Highways team for its consideration.

Complaints handling and Equality

33. Ms F said the Council was in breach of the Equality Act 2010 and failed in its public sector equality duty as it had failed to properly consider the safety of her and other neighbours as a result of the debris, sap, and branches from the tree.
34. However, the Council is not responsible for debris which naturally lands on private properties and on the public footpath. It is Ms F’s duty to keep her own property safe and the local council role to keep the public footpath safe. I have therefore not found fault by the Council for a failure to consider its equality duties. This is because the Equality Act is not relevant to these issues.
35. I would normally expect the Council to respond to all complaints it receives including complaints about trees which may fall under its corporate complaints policy.
36. However, I have not found fault by the Council. In reaching my view I was conscious it:
• responded to Ms F’s concerns, re-inspected the tree, and shared its findings with her;
• explained it was not responsible for the natural debris of trees and the street cleaning. It also explained how Ms F could raise this with the local council; and
• explained any claims for damages as a result of a Council owned tree is not for its complaints process, but a claim should be made to its insurers; and
• refused to consider her complaint under its corporate complaints policy. This was because her complaint was not about the standard of service she had received, but her disagreement with the Council’s decisions around the tree and its responsibilities.
37. Overall, I am therefore satisfied the Council properly addressed Ms F’s complaint without unnecessary delay, and it told her about her right to escalate the matter to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Decision

38. I have completed my investigation with a finding of no fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman