Summary: We should not investigate this complaint, about the removal of a tree by the complainant’s neighbours. This is because it is out of our jurisdiction as a tenancy-related matter.

The complaint

1. I will refer to the complainant as Mr B.
2. Mr B complains his neighbours removed a tree, which had been planted in their garden specifically to provide visual screening between their property and his. Mr B would like the Council to plant a replacement tree.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)
5. We cannot investigate the actions of bodies such as a housing association or private landlord. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 25 and 34(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I reviewed the Council’s response to Mr B’s complaint, and documents on the Council’s planning portal.

Back to top

What I found

7. Mr B’s property backs onto a site which, over several years, has undergone a major residential redevelopment. Part of this work involved the removal of a belt of trees, which screened Mr B’s house, and his neighbours’, from the previous buildings. To restore some of the privacy which was lost as a result, the developer agreed to plant a new tree in the garden of each of the row of new properties, which would border the gardens of Mr B and his neighbours.
8. However, in 2023 Mr B says the occupiers of the new property immediately behind his property cut the tree down and replaced it with a shed.
9. Mr B complained to the Council, which responded to say that, although there had been an agreement for the trees to be planted, neither the Council nor developer was responsible for maintaining them; and that it had informed local residents had of this in 2019. It said it would therefore not replace the tree.
10. Mr B then referred his complaint to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Analysis

11. I have considered whether the removal of the tree constitutes a planning enforcement issue, which is would be for the Council to investigate.
12. The Council placed a condition on the planning permission for the site, requiring the developer to submit a landscaping plan for the Council’s approval at an appropriate juncture. The developer submitted the plan, which showed the location for the planned trees, in 2019, and the Council approved this – discharging the condition – in 2021. As the Council has said, there is nothing in this decision requiring the developer to ensure the trees are maintained, once the development is complete.
13. This means the tree’s removal is not a planning enforcement issue, and so there is no role for the Council here in this respect.
14. Mr B says the occupiers of the neighbouring property are council tenants. I have no way to confirm this on the information available to me.
15. However, if Mr B is correct, then it may be for the Council to address the removal of the tree in its role as landlord. But, as I noted in paragraph 4, we have no jurisdiction to investigate complaints about the Council’s management of social housing. So this is not something I have any power to consider, even if it is for the Council to deal with it.
16. Alternatively, if Mr B is incorrect, and the property is owned either by a housing association or private landlord, then we have no power to investigate because such bodies do not fall into our jurisdiction at all.
17. Taking these points together, therefore, we should not investigate Mr B’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

18. I have decided not to investigate Mr B’s complaint.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman