The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the trimming of a tree. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
The complaint
Mr Y complained the Council refused to cut back branches on a tree which was under a Tree Preservation Order (TPO), resulting in debris and bird droppings falling onto Mr Y’s vehicle and property.
Mr Y says he is concerned about the size of the tree in the long-term causing damage to his property, his inability to install solar panels due to the height of the tree and the mess and potential damage from the mess to his car.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6)) We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr Y contacted the Council about a tree, which was under a TPO, outside his home in March 2022. The Council carried out a site visit to inspect the tree and spoke to Mr Y. It found the highway was not affected by the tree and suggested Mr Y use a cover on his car. Mr Y asked his concerns to be considered as a formal complaint as he had had the tree inspected by other professionals who had said it needed trimming.
The Council responded that it had considered the condition of the tree, but its current growth did not meet the threshold for works. It said it had carried out a further inspection of the tree in April, following which it agreed to arrange for some patching work to be done to the pavement, but said it did not find any health and safety defects during its inspection. Mr Y then approached us in September.
Analysis The Council has decided not to act to cut back branches on the tree outside Mr Y’s home. It has decided this in the basis of relevant factors such as the condition of the tree and its impact on the area surrounding it such as the pavement. It has agreed to act where the Council in its professional opinion feels this is necessary. Mr Y disagrees with the Council’s assessment, saying he has sought the views of others to support this.
It is not the Ombudsman’s role to decide which opinion is right or wrong. 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. As the Council has properly considered the issue before making its decision not to act further, it is unlikely we would find fault. Consequently, we will not investigate this complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman