The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse a request to remove a protected tree. This is because the complainant has appealed to the Planning Inspector. It is unlikely we would find fault in relation to the remaining issues complained about.
The complaint
Mr X has complained about the Council’s refusal to allow him to remove a tree in his neighbour’s garden. Mr X says the Council’s decisions relating to protected trees in the area are inconsistent and his neighbour’s tree is impacting his property.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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) 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), as amended) We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X applied to the Council for permission to remove his neighbour’s tree. The application was refused as the Council said there was insufficient justification for the removal. Mr X used his right to appeal to the Planning Inspector and the appeal was dismissed. The Ombudsman cannot investigate when someone has appealed to the Planning Inspector, even if the appeal did not address all the issues complained about.
Mr X says the Council has approved other similar applications in the area. But the Council will need to consider each application it receives on its own merits, and it has explained why the applications Mr X has referred to were approved. I understand Mr X may disagree, but the Council was entitled to use its professional judgement in this regard.
The Council has since granted permission to carry out work to the protected tree. Before this application was approved, Mr X says the Council told his tree surgeon that a further request to remove the tree would be refused. However, if Mr X disagrees, he can again apply for permission to fell the tree and appeal to the Inspector if the application is refused.
Mr X has complained about the Council’s complaint handling. However, where the Ombudsman has decided not to investigate the substantive issues complained about, we will not usually use public resources to consider more minor matters such as complaint handling.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has appealed to the Planning Inspector. It is unlikely we would find fault in relation to the remaining issues complained about.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman