Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council imposing a tree preservation order and refusing Mr X’s request to trim the trees. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council imposing a tree preservation order (TPO) after he made a request to have trees trimmed.
2. Mr X said the Council made its decision unfairly and the trees are impacting his local area.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X issued a Section 211 notice to the Council of his intent to have trees in his local area trimmed. A Section 211 notice must be submitted when performing work on trees which are in a conservation area but are not subject to a TPO.
8. A Council can reply to a Section 211 notice by either agreeing to the work, or by imposing a TPO.
9. In response to the notice, the Council sent an officer to the trees to carry out an assessment.
10. The Council decided the proposed works were excessive and unnecessary. In its complaint response to Mr X, it provided details of its considerations and referred to why it disagreed as to the claimed dimensions of the trees and how this affected a nearby building.
11. Therefore, the Council chose to impose a TPO and open a 28-day consultation period in which submissions could be made by those with an interest in the matter, including Mr X.
12. We are not an appeals body and we cannot overturn the Council’s decision. We look at how the Council made its decision and whether there was any flaw in that decision-making. If there was no fault in the Council’s decision-making, we cannot question it. The evidence at hand suggests that we would not find fault in the Councils decision-making and therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman