Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council leaving a tree stump on the highway outside his home. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains the Council has cut down a highway tree next to his home but has left the tree stump. Mr B says the Council has not given a clear or consistent explanation why it cannot give a timescale for the removal of this stump. Mr B also complains the Council has proposed replacement trees on his road but has not provided details such as the exact locations or how they will affect residents’ use of this narrow road.

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 an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(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 Mr B and have viewed this location online.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council says it has made this tree safe and it has left the remaining stump in a condition that does not prevent an immediate hazard. And, it will schedule further removal works when resources become available and higher priority works have been completed.
6. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation into this complaint. Local councils have limited resources and must prioritise works which are needed for safety reasons. The lack of a timescale for the stump’s removal is not evidence of fault. And, in any case, Mr B is aware of the presence of this tree stump and any delay removing it by the Council has not caused him a significant injustice.
7. The Council says it has not decided the precise locations for the replacement trees yet and it will consider the impact on the use of the highway by residents. The information indicates the Council is aware of Mr B’s concerns and he may keep in contact with the Council about this issue. At the moment an investigation by the Ombudsman is not justified.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman