Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council saying it is not responsible for maintaining a hedgerow between the highway and the residential area where the complainant lives. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council has responded to the complainant’s concerns, and we could not achieve the outcome he is seeking.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council says it is not responsible for maintaining hedgerows along the boundary of the residential development where he lives. This means residents have to pay for them to be cut instead.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We can 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. So, we do not start an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(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 Mr X and the Council, which included their complaint correspondence.
• The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between Somerset Council and Bath & North East Somerset Council regarding which highway each Council is responsible for maintaining.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. I appreciate Mr X is unhappy Somerset Council says it is not responsible for maintaining the hedgerows.
5. But the Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how the Council made its decisions. If we decide there is insufficient evidence of fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
6. In this case, I consider there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council has considered Mr X’s concerns. It says it has considered the MoU, land ownership records, and inspected the site. It maintains the view that the hedgerow is privately owned, and was satisfied it was not causing a highway safety hazard requiring intervention. These are professional judgements the Council was entitled to reach, even if Mr X disagrees with them.
7. We also cannot adjudicate in ownership disputes. So, we could not achieve the outcome Mr X is seeking, as we cannot determine if the Council is responsible for maintaining the hedge.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault, and we could not achieve the outcome he is seeking.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman