advice or help

[jose]

Want to ask general advice here.

 

Lay out the picture.

 

Customer buys land from the council start of the year ( january). Goes through all legal procedures, gets all documents and deeds from the council withing 6 months ( not the fastest buy hey got there.)

Gets fencing put around his new land ( so extends his back garden). This fencing is up for 3-4 months.

Wants to remove the trees in his new parcel of land. 

Gets quotes.

Also contacts the council on 2 different occasions asking if his property/ trees are protected. Tree officer replies stating no trees on his property.

Customer also uses council website to do searches on his property and also adjoining / nearby roads to double check. All come back clear.

Normally the contractor would do the checks but as the customer had done it and forwarded on the correspondence between himself and the tree officer and also map searches it appeared all in order. 

Proceeds with removal of trees in August. 

Tree officers come out to site, state that trees are protected and stop work.

The council now intends to prosecute both property owner and tree contractor.

 

The council have now indicated that they may issue a caution as opposed to going to court. 

'MAY'

Can anyone clarify what this means long term? 

Solicitor says this will remain on file and if ever a further breach of the law occurs then it will be used as evidence. 

 

Contractor has never had any issues with the law/ councils, is a Buy with Confidence member for over 10 years , bussiness running for around 15 yrs.

 

Question is to accept a caution or go to court? 

Cheers

 

[Steve Bullman]

Sounds like customer has good records of all of this, I’d say court 

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

I’d want to see the TPOs. Give notice of requirement to view them to LA, go in have a look, then be better informed to make a call....

 

it could be that the person supplying the “no TPOs” info checked the curtilage of his property BEFORE it was expanded rather than after....?

Edited May 13, 2018 by kevinjohnsonmbe

[felixthelogchopper]

7 minutes ago, Steve Bullman said:

Sounds like customer has good records of all of this, I’d say court 

Ditto. Accepting a caution is an admission of guilt. Customer was acting in good faith on the strength of information received from the relevant authority. Customer would still be well-advised to take qualified legal advice.

[Steve Bullman]

Sounds like the council know they don’t have a leg to stand on but dropping it entirely would be them admitting that.  They might be offering a caution to save face 

[Stubby]

Sounds like the TO looked at the old boundary and not the new (yet to be ) updated boundary .

[nepia]

Agree with the above.

A Caution cannot be issued to an adult without an admission of guilt. Such an admission should be recorded in writing by the investigating authority, signed of course by the alleged offender to the effect that he both admits the offence and accepts the Caution.

Definitely definitely engage a suitably qualified solicitor.  Also be prepared to engage a techie (if needed) to trace and preserve the web searches that showed 'no tree restrictions'.

 

The only small caveat is that all of the original post is true and hasn't been subject to Chinese Whispers.

[felixthelogchopper]

2 minutes ago, Stubby said:

Sounds like the TO looked at the old boundary and not the new (yet to be ) updated boundary .

OP says that customer searched own property and surrounding roads for any TPOs some 3 to 4 months after the deeds were transferred to them. I would think that it wouldn't be too hard to argue that he had made all reasonable attempts to ensure that there were no applicable TPOs and also that it would be reasonable to expect the council to have updated the boundaries after that period of time, particularly as they were the vendor IIRC.

[Stubby]

Just now, felixthelogchopper said:

OP says that customer searched own property and surrounding roads for any TPOs some 3 to 4 months after the deeds were transferred to them. I would think that it wouldn't be too hard to argue that he had made all reasonable attempts to ensure that there were no applicable TPOs and also that it would be reasonable to expect the council to have updated the boundaries after that period of time, particularly as they were the vendor IIRC.

Exactly .

[jose]

Contractor has a solicitor. They say accept the caution but there is a feeling that this is the easy way for them ( supplied by contractors insurance broker).

 

No Chinese whispers either. Its exactly as stated.

Personally it seems to me the Tree officer didnt either check properly and or someone hadnt updated the information ( but definiatley the council pocketed the money for land sale). 

 

To save face offer a caution as a sort of win win for them, no loss of face and still slapping contractors wrist.