Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s failure to properly consider her request for a hedge overhanging the highway to be cut back to the kerb. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council which has caused her injustice. We will not exercise discretion to consider the works carried out in previous years because they are outside the 12-month limit for considering complaints.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mrs X, complained about the Council failing to cut back a hedge on the roadside for 3 years. She says she wants the hedge to be cut back to the kerbside but has not received such an assurance.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council.

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

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered all the information which Mrs X submitted with her complaint. I have also considered the Council’s response. Mrs X has been given an opportunity to comment on a draft copy of my decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mrs X says the hedge near her home has been overgrown for three years and that the Council has failed to take action when she reported it in previous years. She reported the hedge again in June 2020 and the Council scheduled works in July. The Council says it cannot comment on complaints about matters more than 12-months previous and the current works are low-priority due to the status of the road.
6. Miss X wanted an assurance that the hedge would be cut back to the kerbside as this has not happened previously. The Council says any growth overhanging the highway will be cut back and the drainage channel cleared of undergrowth.
7. We cannot specify the extent of the proposed works because this is for the highway authority to decide. Highway authorities have a duty to maintain the highway for the safety of highway users. We will not exercise discretion to consider works in previous years because there is insufficient evidence of fault arising from this.

Back to top

Final decision

8. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council which has caused her injustice. We will not exercise discretion to consider the works carried out in previous years because they are outside the 12-month limit for considering complaints.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman