Can anyone help shed some light.on this

[philip2011]

Hi people my customer has a slight dilemma  and we don't know where.to take the situation.

 

The customer has recently bought.the property ( ex council/ housing association) house they bought it.outright so none right to buy or morgage  the property belongs to them outright 

There is a clause in the deeds of the the house stating.thay no Tree shall be removed without prior permission from the cheif executive. My question is who is that?

The house had. No TPO not in conservation  so no issues there 

 

There is no morgage. The HA have signed it.over to.my customer so I assume they have no say in it as legally the house is not there's anymore  do they have to seek permission from themselves to chop their tree's down ?

[roys]

Talking from no legal stand point or knowledge, but to me it sounds like the deeds are referring to the the financial owner of the property which in the case is the owner occupier.

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Sounds to me like a 'restrictive covenant' so better to check with the former owner, i.e. the Local Authority / Housing Association, probably their legal dept. to seek consent.  

[matelot]

If you sell property you can put conditions on the title deeds that affect what the new owner can do with the property.

 

My legal understanding is that the person that put the conditions on can really only legally do something if they are still a neighbour. Does the Housing Association still own neighbouring properties?

 

I'd imagine as long as you're not going to greatly impact on the visual street scene you would get permission to cut trees down - if it was a small tree I'd be tempted to just cut it down.

[philip2011]

Thers the is 5 all together to come out one ash 3 sycamore  and a popular to out all in a Very very small.garden they have all outgrown their surroundings blocking  A lot.of light into.the property and garden and restricting future building works as for.the neighbours I wouldn't be able to comment at this moment in time 

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

"Belt-n-braces", put your proposal / plan in writing, submit it to the owners and advise they seek agreement from the previous owner, as mentioned above.

 

Ultimately I believe the liability is solely theirs, not yours as you would be simply working on their instruction (obviously this is not the same if the tree is legally protected y TPO / CA / felling licence (not applicable in private / residential gardens.))

 

PS I would avoid citing their future proposals, e.g. to build on the land, but it would be helpful if you/they stated reasons for the works and if good arboricultural / silvicultural practice is included so much the better.     

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

4 hours ago, philip2011 said:

Hi people my customer has a slight dilemma  and we don't know where.to take the situation.

 

The customer has recently bought.the property ( ex council/ housing association) house they bought it.outright so none right to buy or morgage  the property belongs to them outright 

There is a clause in the deeds of the the house stating.thay no Tree shall be removed without prior permission from the cheif executive. My question is who is that?

The house had. No TPO not in conservation  so no issues there 

 

There is no morgage. The HA have signed it.over to.my customer so I assume they have no say in it as legally the house is not there's anymore  do they have to seek permission from themselves to chop their tree's down ?

Hey Philip, if they've just bought the house, the solicitor that undertook the conveyancing / searches should have highlighted any applicable covenants or restrictions.  That should be the first place they should seek advice (at least that's what I'd do.)

 

If none are shown, and no TPO/CA restrictions apply, consider the need for Felling Licence (if volumes require)

 

It's an interesting question about covenants on deeds.  I've just done 4x TPO reductions in an area where all the neighbours have a max 30' tree height restriction on their deeds but 1 neighbour had their trees TPO'd - seemingly in defiance of the covenant.  

 

The question from all the other neighbours was - how come he could do that and what can we do about it.  My reply, not much really, take a civil action if you've got more money than sense.

 

Be interested t see what types of replies you get... 

 

 

[philip2011]

2 hours ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

Hey Philip, if they've just bought the house, the solicitor that undertook the conveyancing / searches should have highlighted any applicable covenants or restrictions.  That should be the first place they should seek advice (at least that's what I'd do.)

 

If none are shown, and no TPO/CA restrictions apply, consider the need for Felling Licence (if volumes require)

 

It's an interesting question about covenants on deeds.  I've just done 4x TPO reductions in an area where all the neighbours have a max 30' tree height restriction on their deeds but 1 neighbour had their trees TPO'd - seemingly in defiance of the covenant.  

 

The question from all the other neighbours was - how come he could do that and what can we do about it.  My reply, not much really, take a civil action if you've got more money than sense.

 

Be interested t see what types of replies you get... 

 

 

Cheers. Bud it's only small.print on the deeds cheeked with TO and not TPO of CA so all clear on that side of things think it's just a genetic "standard" title deed that particular company use  is not specific ton species or location of tree's  

[Stubby]

Only a stab but the Chief Executive could be the CE of the housing association and the clause might only have applied when  it was a HA house .

[openspaceman]

9 hours ago, matelot said:

My legal understanding is that the person that put the conditions on can really only legally do something if they are still a neighbour. Does the Housing Association still own neighbouring properties?

 

 

Yes this is true of a covenant, the person who benefits from the covenant must have adjoining land. Even then they would have to prove a loss if the tree were removed. It may be another sort of charge on the land though or even a simple contract between vendor and buyer.