The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council failing to register a tree preservation order (TPO) for a plot of land near her property, and enforcement officers not visiting the site for 12 days after her report of the trees’ removal. There is insufficient significant personal injustice caused by the matters complained of to warrant investigation.
Investigation of the enforcement officers’ actions would not lead to a different outcome.
The complaint
Mrs X lives near a site whose owner removed all trees and shrubs from it. She complains: the Council failed to register a tree preservation order (TPO) for the site with the Land Registry several years ago; planning enforcement did not visit the site until 12 days after she had reported the matter.
Mrs X says the current owner of the property removed all trees and shrubs from the property, including those covered by the TPO.
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: any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement; or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information from Mrs X, relevant online maps, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council has accepted fault in not registering the TPO with the Land Registry several years ago. On investigating the matter, officers determined their oversight meant the property’s owner would not have seen there was a TPO at the time they bought it, so would not have known about the restrictions the TPO placed on works to the trees. As a result of its error, the Council does not intend to enforce against the owner for clearing the site of trees and other vegetation.
There was administrative fault by the Council in not registering the TPO at the Land Registry. That fault was not the direct cause of the trees’ removal; the owner, and people acting on their behalf, removed the trees. But the Council’s earlier fault did contribute to the circumstances in which the owner of the property subsequently removed the trees covered by the TPO.
However, although this fault occurred, we will not investigate further. We do not investigate a complaint solely because there has been fault. We must also consider whether the fault has caused significant injustice to the person complaining. Mrs X’s property and the site from which the trees were removed are separated by at least 50 metres. There are numerous mature trees within that separating land, shielding the site from Mrs X’s property. There is insufficient impact on Mrs X and her property caused by the loss of the trees and vegetation to amount to a significant personal injustice warranting an investigation. We recognise Mrs X may be disappointed, frustrated and annoyed by the trees’ loss and that no enforcement is likely to be taken against the site’s owner. But that is not a significant enough personal injustice to justify an investigation. The perceived good fortune of the owner in respect of enforcement is also not a personal injustice to Mrs X.
Mrs X says enforcement officers took about 12 days after her report of the trees’ removal to visit the site. Officers are entitled to prioritise their work depending on circumstances, including other enforcement commitments. Officers attending the site sooner would not have changed the outcome regarding the trees, as Mrs X’s report was that they had been removed. Once they gathered the relevant evidence, including from their visit and the TPO information, they reached their enforcement decision. An investigation of these officers’ response would not now lead to a different outcome regarding the trees or the enforcement matter, so we will not conduct one.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because: there is insufficient significant personal injustice caused to her by the matters complained of to justify an investigation; and investigation of the enforcement officers’ response to her report would not lead to a different outcome.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman