Summary: We will not investigate Miss C’s complaint that the trees on her road are damaging the pavement and causing a nuisance for residents. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss C complains the Council has failed to properly investigate her concerns about the condition of the trees on her road. Miss C says frequent bird fouling affects vehicles parked on her road, and tree roots have damaged the pavement. Miss C says the Council has substantially pruned the trees on nearby roads, but not on her road. Miss C says in response to her complaint the Council did not address all her concerns and the Council provided its final response despite saying it had not received all the information it had requested.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Miss C and have viewed this location online.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council has explained that it does not remove healthy trees solely because of nuisance caused by bird mess. The Council said it inspects the crab apple trees on Miss C’s road every two years and the Council did not identify any works that were needed during the last inspection in August 2025. The Council added the London Plane trees are on a two year pollard cycle and work is scheduled for the winter of 2026/27.
6. The Council said the pavement defects would appear to be isolated rather than systemic.
7. But, the Council said it has recorded Miss C’s observations about the condition of the pavement and these will be taken into account during future inspections. The Council has also explained the options it has available if a tree is causing persistent and significant damage, but the Council says at the moment this threshold has not been met.
8. The information indicates the Council has taken Miss C’s concerns seriously and has responded to the main issues she has complained about. The Council has not commented on the trees on the nearby roads Miss C has referred to. But, these roads may be on a different maintenance schedule, and this does not justify an investigation by the Ombudsman.
9. Overall, the Council has provided a suitable response to Miss C’s complaint and there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Miss C’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman