Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to prune or remove trees on woodland close to Mrs X’s home. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complained the Council has refused to prune or remove tress on woodland close to her home. Mrs X says falling branches from the trees pose a health and safety risk. Mrs X says the trees block her light and believes the Council are in breach of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act. Mrs X wants the Council to reduce the height of the trees or to replace them with smaller trees.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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))
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In response to Mrs X’s complaint the Council said there was no evidence the tress posed any harm. It said there was a common law right for Mrs X to remove any overhanging branches. The trees were deciduous and did not therefore fall under ‘High Hedge’ legislation. There was no legal right to light other than via a lawful easement which did not apply. The Council explained why it had carried out work to woodland in a nearby location. The Council said the trees were clear of the boundary line and it needed to prioritise its resources to meet its statutory obligations. The Council said no work needed to be scheduled.
7. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. We do not act as a right of appeal and can only question a council’s decision if there was fault in the way it was reached. In this case, the Council’s decisions appear in line with its policy and the law. Although I accept Mrs X disagrees with the Council’s position, we cannot question a decision taken without fault. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman