Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s enforcement of a Remedial Notice. This is because any injustice Mr Y may have suffered is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains on behalf of Mr Y that the Council has issued a Remedial Notice without verifying the boundary hedge ownership and has continued enforcement action against Mr Y. He says the Council has repeatedly failed to reply to correspondence and the situation has caused huge stress. Mr Y wants the Council to undertake a land survey to discover correct ownership of the boundary.

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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council issued a Remedial Notice to Mr Y after receiving a complaint about a high hedge it believed was on his land. The Council says Mr Y did not say the hedge was not on his land at the time, and he did not appeal the notice. After the compliance period expired, the Council warned Mr Y that failure to comply could lead to prosecution.
6. A relative later contacted the Council to say the hedge was not on Mr Y’s land. The Council then paused enforcement action while it made further enquiries. The Council says it could not access Mr Y’s property to establish the hedge’s precise location. As it found no conclusive evidence about ownership, it decided not to take further enforcement action. On this basis, I am satisfied that any injustice Mr Y may have suffered is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because any injustice he may have suffered is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman