Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Cambridge City Council

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 21-013-703 Sector Environment And Regulation Category Trees Decided 19 January 2022

View Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a remedial notice issued under high hedges legislation. Ms X exercised her right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate and the matter is outside our jurisdiction.

The complaint

Ms X complained about the Council’s implementation of a High Hedges remedial notice on her under the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003. She says an initial letter in 2018 wrongly identified her property and the Council’s procedures for assessing the hedge were flawed. She says the action under the notice has caused unnecessary damage to her trees and claimed £10,000 in compensation from the Council.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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)) The Planning Inspectorate is the body representing the Secretary of State with regard to appeals about high hedge remedial notices.

We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a government minister. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of a government minister. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended)

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by the complainant.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

Ms X says the Council served a remedial notice on her for the height of her hedge which has caused the neighbours to make a complaint. She says an initial letter wrongly identified her property and that the Council’s inspector did not carry out his assessments impartially or view from her property.

The Council says the typing error was corrected in subsequent correspondence and the assessment and notice followed the correct procedure. It has a duty to responded to requests to consider high hedges under the legislation and its actions were part of the statutory process.

Ms X challenged the remedial notice by appealing to the Planning Inspectorate. The appeal was unsuccessful, and the Planning Inspector made his own decision about the site. This decision is binding on the council and the parties involved and we have no authority to investigate once an appeal has been submitted, regardless of the outcome.

Final decision

We will not investigate Ms X’s this complaint about a remedial notice issued under high hedges legislation. Ms X exercised her right of appeal to the Planning Inspectorate and the matter is outside our jurisdiction.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Cambridge City Council

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-026-632 Other
25-008-114 13 Jan 2026 Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to inform the complainants about changes to the Right … Other
25-008-589 12 Dec 2025 Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s management of public bins. This is because there is not … Other
25-010-011 08 Dec 2025 Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his homelessness application and its management of … Other
25-011-547 18 Nov 2025 Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to refund Mr X’s payment for parking following the … Other
View all decisions for this organisation