Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a possible breach of planning control and concerns about the use of a building. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained about the Council’s decision to grant permission for the removal of a protected tree and says the conditions placed on the permission have not been complied with. Mr X has also complained about how the Council dealt with his concerns about a group using a community centre in the area.

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 or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. 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. The Council received an application for permission to remove a protected tree in the area were Mr X lives. The Council considered the application and granted permission for the removal of the tree subject to conditions. One of the conditions said a replacement tree must be agreed with the Council before the work is carried out.
7. Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision to grant permission for the removal of the tree. However, I am satisfied the Council properly considered the application before granting permission and the case officer’s report explained why the removal was necessary. The Council was entitled to use its professional judgement in this regard. As the Council properly considered the application it is unlikely I would find fault.
8. Mr X says the conditions have not been complied with as a replacement tree was not agreed before the original tree was removed. However, councils do not need to take formal action just because a condition has been breached. The Council has confirmed an enforcement officer is still working with the applicant to agree a suitable replacement.
9. Mr X has raised concerns about the group using the community centre. However, I am satisfied the Council has properly considered Mr X’s concerns and explained why further action is not required.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman