Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to prune a tree near his property. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and we cannot achieve the outcome he wants.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s decision not to prune a large tree near his property. The matter has caused Mr X frustration. He wants the Council to prune the tree.

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 cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. 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

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X said there is a large tree next to his property with an overhanging branch. He said the tree is damaging his roof, gutters and causing mould in his property which is subsequently affecting his health. He said the tree is blocking the streetlight and debris falling from the tree has nearly hit people visiting his property. Mr X asked the Council to prune the tree however, the Council refused to do so. Mr X then complained to the Council.
7. In response to Mr X’s complaint, a tree expert carried out an inspection of the tree. The inspection found the tree did not currently require cutting back however some other non-urgent works were required such as removing the dead wood. The Council informed Mr X that it would arrange to carry out the non-urgent work within the next six months. The Council explained to Mr X it made its decision not to cut back the tree in line with its tree management plan about protecting trees from unnecessary pruning.
8. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision if there was no fault in how an organisation reached the decision in question. The Council made its decision following an inspection it completed of the tree and in line with its management plan to protect trees from unnecessary pruning. This was appropriate. Therefore, there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation. We recognise Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision but this does not mean the Council is at fault.
9. As we are not investigating Mr X’s complaint, we cannot achieve the outcome he wants.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and we cannot achieve the outcome he wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman