Yes, I have been to see the teapot today, and NO, it is not a hazard in my view. It certainly overhangs part of the pavement (see photo below), but the teapot spout is more than 6 feet above the pavement, and there is plenty of width remaining between the hedge and the kerb. This is a quiet residential road, not a busy high street, so the occasional narrowing of the pavement is not a problem. There are many residential roads in Chiswick, with narrower pavements than Riverview Grove, where the council's own street trees cause more obstruction than the teapot.
There has been reference to section 154 of the Highways Act 1980. This states that "where a hedge, tree or shrub overhangs a highway ... so as to endanger or obstruct the passage of ... pedestrians, ... [the local highway authority] may, by notice ... to the owner ... require him within 14 days ... to lop or cut it as to remove the cause of the danger, obstruction or interference." Given the overall width of the pavement, the height of the spout and the fact that the hedge appears to be tied by wire to a post or wall, it seems to me that there is no real danger and no significant obstruction.
Section 154 also says that "a person aggrieved by a requirement under [the subsection summarised above] may appeal to a magistrates’ court."
Personally I do get irritated by householders who fail to control hedges and trees that genuinely obstruct narrow pavements, but this isn't one of those. It is a work of art. I note that the owners are considering trying "to move it back without killing it". This sounds risky for the hedge. Perhaps any such action can be delayed pending an appeal or a reassessment by the council.
"More enquiries told us that a councillor's letter on behalf of that person resulted in the inspection."
So the council officers wouldn't have bothered had it not been for pressure from a councillor? I think that that councillor had better explain why he or she acted in that way.
