Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to prune some trees. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council will not prune some trees or allow them to be replaced by a species which is more appropriate for the location. Mr X says the Council is not willing to compromise.

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 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 Mr X. This includes the complaint correspondence. I also considered the Council’s tree policy and our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. There are two Council owned trees near Mr X’s home. Mr X says they drop leaves causing increased property maintenance and blocked gutters. He also says the trees block light and reduce the effectiveness of his solar panels. Mr X asked the Council to prune the trees or replace them with a species that is more appropriate. Mr X offered to pay for the replacement.
6. The Council’s tree officer inspected the trees and found them to be in a good condition. The Council declined to do any tree work but said the trees are on an inspection routine and the Council would do any safety related pruning which is identified. The Council offered advice on reducing the impact of fallen leaves and explained that inappropriate pruning can weaken a tree. It also explained the trees would quickly re-grow if pruned.
7. The Council acknowledged Mr X’s offer to pay to replace the trees but said there are wider tree-related issues to consider. The Council said it assesses trees in relation to the national tree standards and, in accordance with those standards, no work is needed. The Council responded to Mr X’s concerns about his solar panels by discussing the relative merits of tree carbon capture and solar panels.
8. Mr X says the trees are a nuisance and the Council ignored the opinions of residents. However, I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault. The Council responded appropriately by inspecting the trees and explaining why it would not do any pruning. The Council’s policy says it will manage trees in accordance with the British Standards and it aims to allow trees to keep to their natural form and size. It adopts a risk based approach to pruning as identified through regular inspections. The policy also says the Council will not prune for issues such as leaf fall or light. The Council’s decision reflects the policy and it is not fault for a council to follow the findings of qualified tree officers. In addition, we do not act as an appeal body and we cannot ask the Council to do something when that would be contrary to the tree policy and the judgement of tree officers.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman