Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a hedge which has overgrown over the pavement because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms Y complained the Council failed to act on her concerns about an overgrown hedge obstructing the pavement outside her home and driveway.
2. Ms Y says the hedge blocks her view when she is exiting her driveway which she says is a safety concern. Ms Y says she feels ignored.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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))
4. 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

5. I considered information Ms Y and the Council provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms Y complained to the Council about a hedge on the boundary of her property which was overgrown and spilling onto the pavement outside her property in May 2025. The Council inspected the site in July 2025. From this inspection it concluded that the hedge while overgrown did not meet the level required for it to intervene. Consequently, the Council decided it would not take further action. Ms Y was unhappy about this and complained to the Council. She then approached us.
7. We are not an appeal body and we cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached.
8. In this case, the Council has visited the site of the hedge. It considered the intervention levels it has for such issues and found that, having seen the hedge Ms Y had complained about, the intervention level was not met. It then decided not to act any further on the issue.
9. While Ms Y does not believe the Council carried out the site visit, its notes show that a visit was made, and the Council has been able to explain its rationale for its decision not to act. Consequently, as it considered the issue and relevant evidence before making its decision, the decision was made properly. As there is not enough evidence of fault in the decision-making process, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation into this complaint. We will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman