The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to the complainant’s concerns about a highway tree. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing injustice.
The complaint
The complainant, who I will refer to as Ms B, complains that the Council has been at fault in its response to concerns about a highway tree outside her home.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Ms B and her husband have concerns about a highway tree close to their property. They believe the Council has failed to maintain it according to its inspection and maintenance schedule. They are concerned that the growth of the tree could cause subsidence in future, and that cracking to the footpath around the tree causes a trip hazard.
Ms B and her husband brought their concerns to the attention of the Council in 2020. Ms B complains that it delayed making a substantive response and, as a result, she had to make repeated contact and a formal complaint. She further complains that the Council failed to respond according to its complaint procedure.
In response to Ms B’s complaint, the Council says the tree was pruned in 2010, 2016 and 2020, and that no further works are required at this point. It also says it has inspected the footpath and the cracking does not require remedial work. Ms B does not accept the response. She has commissioned a tree report which she has provided to the Council. It says crown reduction works are necessary, and that there is no indication the tree has been pruned recently. She wants the Council to undertake the work recommended in her report and to apologise for its failures in communication.
The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part causing significant injustice to Ms B. The Council and Ms B’s tree report have reached different conclusions. It is not for the Ombudsman to express a view on which is correct.
As we cannot say whether work is necessary, we cannot find that the decision not to do so amounts to fault. Even if we could, the fact that there is no allegation that damage has been caused means there is insufficient injustice to warrant our intervention.
On the face of it, the Council’s responses to Ms B’s service requests and complaint were subject to significant delay. Given that we are not investigating the substantive issues these matters do not, in themselves, provide grounds for investigation.
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing injustice.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman