Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the conduct of a Council officer because it is out of time and there is no good reason to exercise discretion.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains a Council officer behaved unprofessionally, completing reports with libelous and defamatory statements about him. He also complains the Council has delayed deciding on a planning application, imposed a Tree Protection Order (TPO) on his property, and refused him permission to remove an infected tree.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a government minister. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)
4. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of the responsible Government minister. The Planning Inspector considers appeals about:

• Delay – usually over eight weeks – by an authority in deciding an application for planning permission
• A decision to refuse planning permission
• Conditions placed on planning permission
• A planning enforcement notice.

5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
6. 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, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Mr X.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. The Council made a provisional TPO in August 2024 and confirmed this in November 2024, more than 12 months before Mr X contacted us. As Mr X was unhappy with both the decision and a Council officer’s conduct in reaching that decision, he should have complained to the Council and then to us at the time and within 12 months.
10. I note Mr X was awaiting further information, however that is not a good reason for the delay in coming to us. We have the power to gather information we need for our investigations and we can place a case on hold pending further information if needed. Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision and related conduct is out of time and I consider there is no good reason to exercise discretion.
11. The remaining matters are in time.
12. The Council’s Tree officer objected to Mr X’s planning application taking into account the TPO. The planning application has not yet been decided, but if refused, Mr X will have a right to appeal and we would expect him to use it.
13. Mr X is unhappy with the statements in a 2025 Tree officer report and considers these to be incorrect and libellous. The report contains the officer view and/or opinion and so we are unlikely to find fault. Further, the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider a request for the rectification of personal data. And the courts are better placed to consider complaints of defamation and libel action.
14. Mr X has the right to appeal the Council’s delay in deciding his planning application and it is reasonable to expect him to use this.
15. Mr X applied to remove a tree in 2025 and the Council invalidated the application due to missing information. It is open to Mr X to apply again. If refused, Mr X has the right to appeal a refusal of permission to carry out works to a protected tree, and we would expect him to use this right.
16. It is not proportionate to consider Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s complaint handling when we are not investigating the substantive issues.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is out of time.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman