The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s maintenance of an amenity tree in the public highway. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
The complaint
Miss X complained about the Council’s failure to cut back or remove a highway tree outside her home. she says it causes loss of daylight and restricts her mobility on the pavement and limits drop-off and pick-up points from the roadside.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered the information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Miss X says a tree in the footway outside her home has damaged the footway around it with its roots and this causes problems for her as she has limited mobility. She also says the tree limits daylight to her home and asked for it to be removed and the damaged footway re-instated.
The Council does not remove highway trees unless they are diseased or decaying and it pruned the tree in September 2022 and says it is not due for additional work at present. The Council inspected the footway and carried out repairs to it in 2023. Miss X complained again and told it that the repairs were insufficient.
In 2024 the Council resurfaced the area around the tree using a flexible surface treatment and it is satisfied that this has been successful, although it will be monitored during the settlement period.
The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
In this case the Council had to balance Miss X’s complaints about the tree with its environmental benefit to the community as a whole. It responded to the highway issues and has carried out maintenance work in line with its policy on amenity trees.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s maintenance of an amenity tree in the public highway. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman