The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions on a high hedge complaint. The neighbour has appealed to the Planning Inspector against the Council’s remedial notice. The Council cannot take further action as the decision on the hedge lays with the Planning Inspector. Therefore, we do not consider an investigation will lead to a worthwhile outcome.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council failed to act on his reports of the nuisance caused by his neighbour’s high hedge.
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 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 no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X complains the Council delayed in taking action on his complaints about the nuisance caused by his neighbour’s high hedge.
The Council served a remedial notice on the neighbour in June 2023. It confirms the neighbour has appealed to the Planning Inspector against the notice.
As the neighbour has appealed, the decision about the hedge lays with the Planning Inspector. The Council cannot force the neighbour to cut down the hedge. Nor can it cut the hedge itself and charge the neighbour for the work.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the decision about his neighbour hedge lays with the Planning Inspector. And we cannot require the neighbour or the Council to cut down the hedge. Therefore, an investigation will not achieve a worthwhile outcome.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman