Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s maintenance of basal growth from trees along the complainant’s road. There is not enough evidence of fault causing significant injustice in the planned maintenance schedule adopted by the Council, and it has taken satisfactory action to address the delay in carrying out the 2024 works.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council’s maintenance of basal growth from trees along his road is inadequate. This results in the pavement and parking bays being obstructed.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We can 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. So, we do not start an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation, or
• we are satisfied with the actions an organization has already taken.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6) & (7), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council, which included their complaint correspondence. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. I appreciate Mr X thinks the basal growth should be cut back earlier in the year, prior to the growing season.
5. But it is for the Council to make its own decisions on how to allocate its limited resources. The Ombudsman does not make operational or policy decisions on a council’s behalf, or provide a right of appeal against a decision to adopt a certain policy, so we cannot direct the Council to change its maintenance schedule.
6. The Council says work is generally undertaken in the summer months, as it is not feasible to co-ordinate at any other time of the year. Priority roads/locations are dealt with first for health and safety reasons, with Mr X’s road due to form part of the second tranche of priority works in 2024. The Council says its Trees Service has engaged with the Highways Service, which is satisfied with the approach to the planned maintenance of these trees. Residents are also able to report problems with trees outside of the schedule.
7. As such, I consider there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council has decided to implement its maintenance regime to justify investigating this part of the complaint.
8. Furthermore, our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered a serious loss, harm or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss of injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
9. We would not consider the frustration and inconvenience Mr X has described as a serious loss, harm or distress which would justify use of public funds to investigate his concerns about the maintenance schedule.
10. Finally, the Council’s apology for the 1-month delay in undertaking the 2024 maintenance, and the steps it has taken to further liaise with its contractors in the future, are a satisfactory way to address that specific issue.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault causing significant injustice in the planned maintenance of the trees, and the Council has taken satisfactory action to address the delay in completing the 2024 works.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman