Case Stories
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Mr. E has a Norway maple in front of his home, more than half of which is on city property. In the past, the city has pruned the tree under the boundary line street tree policy. In April 2009, a storm broke a limb, which was hanging dangerously. Mr. E phoned the city for assistance and was told the tree was privately owned and therefore his responsibility. Mr. E left a message to speak to a supervisor that Friday morning. He did not hear from the supervisor that day and, not knowing when he would hear back, he hired a contractor to remove the branch.
On Monday, the supervisor called to tell Mr. E that he could request an inspection from the city as the tree was on the property boundary line. When informed Mr. E had taken matters into his own hands, the supervisor refused to reimburse him retroactively for the private contractor.
Ombudsman staff contacted the supervisor who confirmed that the staff member who took Mr. E’s first call gave him incorrect information. The supervisor said she did not have the authority to reimburse him. Mr. E said that if the city had given him the correct information when he first phoned, he would have asked the city to remove the broken branch.
Result: The office fixed the problem by writing to the General Manager who agreed to reimburse Mr. E because he had been given incorrect information.
Follow @TO_Ombuds