The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to remove a tree outside the complainant’s home. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and we could not achieve the outcome the complainant wants.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, complains about a tree outside her home which she says the Council has not maintained. The tree overhangs her garden and parking space and drops sap onto her car and garden furniture. Ms X wants the Council to remove the tree.
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 an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence and the tree policy. I also considered our Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council’s tree policy says there is a presumption that trees will be retained. The Council removes trees if they are dead, dying, dangerous or causing structural damage. Trees are retained if they are healthy and do not pose a danger. The policy says the Council will not do tree work for reasons associated with sap or leaf fall.
There is a large tree which overhangs Ms X’s garden and parking space. The tree drops sap onto Ms X’s car and garden furniture. Ms X has to repeatedly clean these items to prevent damage.
Ms X has been reporting this problem for many years. She reported the sap problem in 2018 but, after an inspection, the Council told her it was not required to deal with problems caused by sap.
Ms X reported the same problem this year and involved local councillors. A tree officer inspected the tree and found it to be in a good condition, a low risk and not requiring any work. The Council explained it is not required to do tree work for problems caused by sap and the tree policy does not support removal of a tree for this reason. The Council said the tree was maintained in 2016, 2018 and inspected in 2020.
Ms X disagrees with the decision and says the Council needs to remove the tree due to the problems caused by the sap.
I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council responded appropriately by arranging for a qualified tree officer to inspect the tree. The officer’s professional opinion is that no work is required and it is not fault for the Council to follow this professional advice. The decision is consistent with the policy with regards to the circumstances under which the Council will remove a tree and regarding not doing work for problems caused by sap.
In addition, we could not achieve what Ms X would like as an outcome as we could not ask the Council to prune or remove a tree when that would be contrary to the professional judgment of the tree officer and contrary to the tree policy.
Ms X may disagree with the policy but it is for the Council, not us, to decide how it will manage its trees. If Ms X thinks the policy should be changed, to allow for work due to problems caused by sap, then that is something she would need to raise with the Council. It would be for the Council to decide whether it wants to change the policy.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and we could not achieve the outcome Ms X would like.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman