Tree Removal - Owner is unwilling to pay anything towards the cost.

[Treerover]

No one has mentioned the tree owners legal obligations under his/her ‘Duty of Care’ .
A tree owner has a duty of care to take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which he or she could reasonably foresee may result in harm or injury to people or property of neighbouring land.

If you have a report from a Consultant decreeing the tree structurally compromised due to Ganoderma and is recommending removal, that report has surely helped you focus your “reasonable foresight” ?

All very interesting stuff by some learn’ed people on here.
I think it’s easier climbing them than sorting out the legalities !!??!!

[skyhuck]

15 minutes ago, Treerover said:

No one has mentioned the tree owners legal obligations under his/her ‘Duty of Care’ .
 

You need to go back to page three and have a reread.

[Treerover]

You need to go back to page three and have a reread.

Oopsy, apologies Jamie Breay ??‍♂️

[Khriss]

Let it fall an let the judge sort it - with these posts and other correspondance  - they will face a big bill , K

[Mark Bolam]

Will they though Khriss?

I've seen loads of manky trees fail and smash stuff, and it always seems to be the insurance company who picks up the tab.

The insurance company of the person who has had their wall/shed/car/roof smashed, not the tree owners!

[Khriss]

Actively press charges with verifiable data and reports a Court will accept - wilful negligence IS a criminal act after all , but it aint a path I would enjoy following - if it WAS my land I certainly would , K

[Mark Bolam]

3 hours ago, EdwardC said:

Of course it's the person who's suffered damages insurance company who picks up the bill. That's how it works.

 

Your tree, manky or otherwise, fails and structurally optimises my roof. My insurance company pay for repairs. They then have to decide if it's worth pursuing the tree owner, you, to get their money back. If they do, that would be for your insurer, if you have one, or you if not, to defend a case of negligence in the courts.

Edward, I’m well aware of how it works.

I just don’t know a single case of where this has happened.

[Mesterh]

Insurance is a horrible, horrible business.

Seen many a decent folk stiffed by  their insurance company, seen many a scam artist pocket a few quid. 

 

Some people win and some people loose out big time, it just seems like a big gamble as far as Im concerned. You pays your money and you take your chance.

 

 

[AHPP]

16 minutes ago, Mesterh said:

Insurance is a horrible, horrible business.

 

 

Read about the origins and history of it and the Companies Acts. Bastardry.

[AHPP]

It also had an impact on early employers' liability law. Equally shitty.