Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council responded to the complainant’s reports of problems on an allotment. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mrs X, complains about the Council’s response after she reported problems on the allotment site. Mrs X wants compensation for the impact on her mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council. This includes correspondence between Mrs X and the Council. I considered communications with the neighbouring plot holder but I cannot reveal what they say due to confidentiality rules. I considered our Assessment Code and comments Mrs X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mrs X had an allotment. In February she reported that the tenant on the adjacent plot had cut back branches from one of Mrs X’s trees and put a greenhouse up at the edge of the shared path. The Council advised Mrs X that people can cut back overhanging branches and she should take care around the greenhouse. The Council subsequently visited the plots and told Mrs X that it was reasonable to cut back branches over a shared path and it had asked the neighbour to replace some of the glass in the greenhouse with a safer alternative.
5. Mrs X reported further problems such as trip hazards on the path and repeated that she wanted the greenhouse moved. The Council responded by explaining that the neighbour was in the process of removing the glass and had cleared the path.
6. The Council did another inspection in August. It wrote to Mrs X highlighting several problems it had found on the site. It explained that several issues were relatively minor but it asked Mrs X to cut back a tree. It asked all parties involved in the dispute to change their behaviours. The Council also wrote to the neighbour.
7. Mrs X notified the Council that she was giving up the allotment. She expressed dissatisfaction with the way the Council had responded and has explained that the events have greatly affected her mental health. The Council accepted her notice ending her tenancy of the plot.
8. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council responded appropriately by inspecting the plots and asking both parties to take action. It also explained why some of the events that had occurred were not a breach of the tenancy. It is possible the action taken by the Council may have resolved the problems but, as Mrs X has ended her tenancy, this cannot not be known. The actions taken by the Council until Mrs X gave notice do not suggest fault requiring an investigation.
9. Mrs X wants to know whether the neighbour removed the glass. However, I cannot disclose information relating to someone else. Mrs X also says it was unnecessary for the Council to require her to prune a tree and wants to know why this was a requirement. But, the letter explained that it was overgrowing the shared path. Mrs X may think pruning was not necessary but this does not need an investigation, especially as she has given up the plot.

Back to top

Final decision

10. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman