Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council not taking appropriate action in relation to trees outside her property. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and we would not be able to add to the Council’s investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council has not taken appropriate action in relation to two trees outside her property which she said are a danger to people and may cause damage to her property. She said the matter has caused her anxiety and distress. She wants the Council to cut back the branches.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.

(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 Miss X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X said there are two large trees outside her property.
6. In mid-2025, a large branch fell onto the ground. Miss X said this was close to her property and it narrowly missed a group of children playing nearby. Miss X reported it to the Council and later that day, the Council’s Tree Team attended the property and cut back some branches.
7. Miss X later complained to the Council. She said the Council had failed to maintain the trees despite previous concerns she had raised. Miss X said when the Tree Team attended to her property and removed some branches, one branch had damaged her front door. She wanted the Council to carry out further work to the trees as she was worried about the branches causing serious injury to people and damaging her property further.
8. The Council responded to Miss X’s complaint. It said although it had carried out some emergency work on the tree in question, it was unable to carry out further work due to the tree being protected under a Tree Preservation Order (TPO). It said it had applied to the relevant department for approval to carry out more work. It was currently awaiting approval and once granted, it would carry out the necessary work.
9. The Council also advised Miss X to claim via its insurers if the tree had caused any damage to her property.
10. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council carried out emergency work to the tree to minimise immediate risk. It explained its reasons why it required approval from the relevant department to carry out further work. It did not say it would not carry out further work. This was appropriate. The Council also advised Miss X to submit a claim if she believed the tree had damaged her property, which was also appropriate. We would not be able to add to the Council’s investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and we would not be able to add to the Council’s investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman