Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council made a Tree Preservation Order. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision, and Mr X can seek permission to carry out tree works, which has a right of appeal to the Secretary of State if refused.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council made a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) on trees on his land without consultation. He said this had been stressful and delayed his plans for the land. He would like the Council to apologise, remove the TPO and agree to a site meeting.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)
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)

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 complained the Council made a TPO for trees on his land without consulting him. He said this has impacted his plans for the land.
7. Councils may impose TPOs to trees, groups of trees or woodland to protect them. They may control works on trees such as: cutting down; topping; lopping; uprooting and wilful damage or destruction.
8. Once a TPO is in place, works cannot be carried out without written consent by the Council’s planning authority. Once a TPO is made, the Council must allow 28 days for affected persons and the public to make representations. 
9. In this case, the Council invited representations from interested parties on the TPO in July 2024. This was in line with the procedure set out in the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
10. There had been a change in land ownership around the time of the TPO. In its complaint response, the Council told Mr X it would allow additional time for him to submit his representations about the TPO before the Council decided to confirm, modify or allow the TPO to lapse.
11. The Council considered Mr X’s objections to the TPO and decided in January 2026 to confirm the TPO without modification.
12. Mr X said the TPO had impacted his plans for development on his land. Mr X can seek permission to carry out works on the trees on his land. If permission for works on the trees is refused, Mr X would have a right of appeal to the Secretary of State.
13. We will not investigate this complaint because Mr X could apply for permission to carry out works on the trees. If this permission was refused, Mr X would have a right of appeal.
14. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether the complainant disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
15. I have considered the steps the organisation took to consider the issue, and the information it took account of when deciding to confirm the TPO. There is no evidence of fault in how it took the decision.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision, and Mr X can seek permission to carry out tree works, which has a right of appeal to the Secretary of State if refused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman