DH recently lodged a complaint with our local council about our neighbour's high hedge. I won't bore you with all the background, suffice to say it is very high and a source of misery.
In the complaint form (which for a variety of reasons I didn't see until after DH had lodged it), he said that our grounds for complaining was that the hedge was oppressive and spoils the relevant part of our garden. I have now read around a lot and I am really concerned that my husband wasn't specific enough. For example, he didn't point out the effect on the light into our living room or the fact that the hedge has caused physical damage on our side. All the guidance I have seen seems to suggest that complainant's should give as full grounds as possible when framing their complaint. DH says it will be ok, the form only had a small box in which to set out the grounds for complaining so he couldn't go into all the details, and that we will win because when the council inspect the hedge they will see all of this anyway, but I wanted to check if anyone else knows is this is true. Is it correct that, even if we haven't specified a particular ground, like light or physical damage, the council will still have to consider all the relevant possible grounds?
If we lose the initial complaint and we make an appeal will we be able to be more specific then and add other reasons or will the council reject this as we didn't make out the relevant arguments at the outset and ask us to make another separate complaint - and worse pay another fee?!