Summary: Mr X complained about the Council refusing to sell him a piece of adjacent land. We should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which has caused injustice to Mr X.

The complaint

1. Mr X lives next to some land which is owned by the Council and which is part of the highway verge. He says leaves from trees on the land and roots from plants have damaged his property and he wants to buy the land to include within his boundary. The Council refuses to sell the land to him.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered all the information which Mr X submitted with his complaint. I have also considered the Council’s response. Mr X has been given an opportunity to comment on a draft copy of my decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X says he expressed interest in a piece of land owned by the Council thirty years ago and he was advised it was willing to sell it. He says two years ago a council employee and a local councillor advised him he could buy the land for £1,500. He made no attempt to purchase until 2020. When he made enquiries, the Council told him it was unwilling to sell the land which is part of the highway verge.
5. Mr X says plants from the land have grown into his boundary and he has leaves and twigs which fall onto his property from a tree on the land. He has also suggested cracks in his drive may be related to the tree on the land.
6. The Council says it is unwilling to sell the public land and that it is adequately maintained.
7. There is no statutory obligation for a council to sell a public asset if it is not surplus to requirements. The Ombudsman may not question the merits of decisions which have been made in a proper manner. This means we will not intervene in disagreements about the merits of decisions.
8. If Mr X can provide evidence of damage to his property from tree roots, then he may be able to submit a claim against the Council’s insurers.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which has caused injustice to Mr X.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman