Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council permitting the unauthorised removal of about 200 trees from land next to her property. The complaint is late and there are no good reasons for us to investigate it now. Even if Mrs X’s complaint had not been late, we would not have investigated because there is not enough evidence of Council fault to have warranted investigation and we could not have achieved the outcome she seeks.

The complaint

1. Mrs X lives next to a site whose owner sought planning permission to develop it. She complains the Council has permitted the unauthorised removal of about 200 trees from the site, including a local habitat area.
2. Mrs X wants the Council to replant trees at a ratio of three for every one removed, to comply with its policy on tree replacement.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We would not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating; or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information from Mrs X, relevant online planning documents and maps, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The owner of the site sought planning permission which was refused. They had cleared trees from the site before making the application. Mrs X says in her complaint email to the Council that the tree clearance happened in early 2023. She complained to the Council about it just after it had happened. The Council investigated the allegation that the trees had been removed without appropriate authorisation. Officers found no planning control had been breached and closed the enforcement investigation. Mrs X brought her complaint about the trees’ removal to us in June 2025.
7. We expect people to complain to us about something they consider a council has done wrong within 12 months of them becoming aware of the matter complained of. The contacts Mrs X had with the Council in early 2023 show she knew about the trees’ removal and the Council’s enforcement response from that time and has complained to us over two years later. Therefore, the complaint is late.
8. We may apply our discretion to consider a late complaint but only if we are satisfied there are good reasons to do so. There are no such good reasons here. Even if Mrs X’s complaint had not been late, we would not have investigated.
9. The Council investigated the allegation that the trees had been removed without appropriate authorisation. Officers found no planning control had been breached and closed the enforcement investigation. There is not enough evidence of fault in that decision-making process to give good reason for us to investigate the late complaint now.
10. We note Mrs X claims the trees’ removal was unauthorised based on a 2023 email from a Council planning officer. The officer stated the removal of trees at the site took place, in the Council's view, outside of the planning application process. Mrs X believes this means the removal of the trees was unauthorised. That the trees’ removal was done outside the planning process does not mean the work was unauthorised. It means there were no planning controls on the trees, such as a Tree Preservation Order (TPO), which required the owner to get authorisation or permission before felling them, or which the Council could use to take any enforcement action after they were felled. The officer’s report on the 2023 planning application confirms there were no TPOs in place on the site.
11. We also could not have achieved the outcome Mrs X seeks, for the Council to replant the land with three trees for each one felled. We cannot order councils to replant trees on private land, nor order them to require that to be done by the land’s owner. That we could not have achieved the outcome Mrs X seeks is a further reason why we will not exercise discretion to investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because:
• the complaint is late and there are no good reasons for us to exercise discretion to investigate it now; and
• there is insufficient evidence of fault to have warranted us investigating; and
• we could not have achieved the complaint outcome she seeks.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman