Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the validity of a tree protection order. There is not significant enough injustice to warrant an investigation, and we cannot achieve what Mrs X is looking for.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the validity of a tree preservation order (TPO) placed on a neighbouring property’s trees. Mrs X says the trees are dangerous, diseased and may be causing health issues. Mrs X also complains about the Council’s complaint handling. Mrs X wants the Council to prove the TPO is valid and to help get the trees owner to manage the trees.

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 we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mrs. X.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. A TPO means the owner of the trees cannot cut them down without the Council’s permission. As Mrs X is not the owner of the trees, the TPO does not directly impact her rights in relation to the trees. Whether the TPO is valid or not, Mrs X would still legally need the trees’ owner to agree to any action. If the owner agreed to remove or prune the trees, it would be up to them to then approach the Council for permission. So even if the TPO were invalid, the injustice suffered by Mrs X as a result of the Council’s actions would not be sufficient to warrant investigation, therefore we will not investigate.
6. The TPO does not mean any work to the trees is impossible. The TPO does mean, though, that Mrs X may need to seek permission to cut any parts of the trees that overhang or encroach on her property. There is no evidence that Mrs X has applied for permission. If Mrs X does apply for permission and the Council refuses it, she will have right to appeal to the Secretary of State. So, there is not significant enough injustice to Mrs X to warrant an investigation.
7. As the trees are privately owned, Mrs X’s concerns about the trees are a civil matter between the owner and Mrs X. The Council is not party to the matter, and we cannot compel the Council to take any further action to achieve what Mrs X is looking for.
8. Nor will we investigate Mrs X’s complaint handling concerns. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we decide not to investigate the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because any injustice would not be significant enough to warrant an investigation, and we cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X seeks.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman