Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a dropped kerb. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mrs X, complains about the Council’s decision to replace a vandalised street tree and refuse her application for a dropped kerb. She wants the Council to grant consent for the dropped kerb and not replace the tree.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence, the application, and photographs of the site and the tree. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Mrs X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

4. The Council’s tree strategy is to preserve and secure trees and ensure there is no net loss. It will only approve the removal of a tree if there are good tree-based reasons for doing so. The Council replaces trees which are removed.
5. The dropped kerb policy says the Council will refuse an application if a crossover would be within one metre of a tree.
6. There was a tree outside Mrs X’s property. It was unlawfully removed by an unknown person in an act of vandalism.
7. Mrs X applied to extend her dropped kerb. She asked the Council not to replace the tree to facilitate the dropped kerb application and approval.
8. The Council refused the application because the extended dropped kerb would be within one metre of the tree which the Council is committed to replacing. It said that not replacing the tree, and granting consent for the dropped kerb, had the potential to set an unmanageable precedent. The Council said it would replace the tree in the next planting season.
9. Mrs X disagrees with the decision. She wants to extend the dropped kerb to help manage parking problems and harassment. She says she needs the extension to keep her family safe. Mrs X says the tree could be vandalised again if replaced and says that nobody is taking into account that she is asking for help.
10. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council’s policy is to preserve trees and to refuse dropped kerbs if they would be within one metre of a tree. The Council’s decisions are consistent with the tree policy and the dropped kerb policy so there is no reason to start an investigation. We are not an appeal body and have no power to ask a council to do something which would be contrary to its policies.
11. Mrs X could make a new complaint to the Council if she does not think it has responded appropriately to her reports of harassment. That, however, would be a different complaint to disagreeing with the outcome to her dropped kerb application.

Back to top

Final decision

12. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman