The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to carry out works to highway trees. This is because there is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part.
The complaint
The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr B, complains that the Council has refused to remove or prune trees causing nuisance to residents.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr B says highway trees close to his home cause nuisance to him and to other local residents. He believes the trees are inappropriate for a residential street. He has asked the Council to remove or significantly prune them. He complains that it has refused to do so.
We will not investigate this complaint because there is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part. The Council’s response to Mr B’s complaint clearly explains why it does not regard work to the trees as appropriate. That is a decision for the Council to make and its explanation is consistent with the criteria for works set out in information published on its website.
In the absence of evidence of fault on the Council’s part, there are no grounds for the Ombudsman to criticise the decision it has made, or intervene to substitute an alternative view.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman