advice or help

[daltontrees]

20 hours ago, EdwardC said:

As a contractor you should always check for yourself the protected status of the trees you are going to work on. Do not rely on the client, ever.

 

Did the client undertake a local land search when buying the property. Was the corespondance seeking information on the protected status of the trees in relation to the piece of land they'd just bought, or what was it on the previously owned land. Why did they have to correspond by email to ascertain the protected status of the trees at all. If they'd had a land search done it would have been on there. Were the TPO layers on the mapping turned on, or were they off so the trees didn't show up.

 

Never trust your client. Always check for yourself.

Ahh, further to my rant a few moments ago, I see you said 'client' rather than 'customer'. That's a different relationship, and a different duty to check may arise, depending on terms of appointment.

[Gary Prentice]

24 minutes ago, daltontrees said:

 

 

Caution, my a#%$. I'd take my reputation to hell and back first.

 

I love reading a good rant...

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

11 minutes ago, Gary Prentice said:

I love reading a good rant...

? Rare for Jules’ characteristically thoughtful, measured and broadly considered posts to exceed my characteristic bull-in-a-China-shopeque, shoot from the hip, hot-headed reactionary over exuberance! But he’s right, something’s amiss and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse wouldn’t drag me into any government building to subjugate myself to a nonsensical misappropriation of justice such as has been relayed!

[jose]

man my head hurts

The solicitor is saying she understands why i am upset, why it has transpired as it has but also in court its the facts the council has to prove.

1) did i cut the trees? 

2) were they TPO'd

Regardless of the why, that is mitigating circumstances.

Regardless of if the case is closed/ won i still have a conviction ( ie taken to court of a breech of a TPO) which will stay with me. 

So from a solicitors position even winning is actually worse than a caution.

 

I argued then that if a council can say repeatedly no there isnt a tpo, and then after the work is done turn around and say actually yes there is , regardless of it been put it in a email or letter then surely every single time they give me permission to do any works i can face prosecution in the event they got it wrong regardless of what they have previously said! 

To which she said yes that is how it stands legally.

[Stubby]

3 minutes ago, jose said:

man my head hurts

The solicitor is saying she understands why i am upset, why it has transpired as it has but also in court its the facts the council has to prove.

1) did i cut the trees? 

2) were they TPO'd

Regardless of the why, that is mitigating circumstances.

Regardless of if the case is closed/ won i still have a conviction ( ie taken to court of a breech of a TPO) which will stay with me. 

So from a solicitors position even winning is actually worse than a caution.

 

I argued then that if a council can say repeatedly no there isnt a tpo, and then after the work is done turn around and say actually yes there is , regardless of it been put it in a email or letter then surely every single time they give me permission to do any works i can face prosecution in the event they got it wrong regardless of what they have previously said! 

To which she said yes that is how it stands legally.

That is totally bonkers . Take it to its logical conclusion and no one would do anything just in case they were told porkys . There has to be some degree of common seance and  realism surely ? 

[eggsarascal]

See another solicitor. I'd be going to court.

[Gary Prentice]

Is there a TPO or not?

 

[eggsarascal]

2 minutes ago, Gary Prentice said:

Is there a TPO or not?

 

Would it matter, in court. if there was a TPO if Jose has it on emails/paper from the council that said there was no TPO?

 

 

 

[Stubby]

2 minutes ago, eggsarascal said:

Would it matter, in court. if there was a TPO if Jose has it on emails/paper from the council that said there was no TPO?

 

 

 

To me that is the top and bottom of it , but what do I know ? 

[jose]

when i did the work as far as i could see and from the correspondence with the tree officer there was no tpo. local searches on the council website for the address and surrounding roads didnt bring it up. 

They said after the work was done that yes in fact there was a tpo, even though they had previously said no.

As i see it i did do due diligence, i know the details of the tree officer ( dealt with him via email on numerous occasions) , added with the searches means i checked. only other method is a phone call and as stated the tree officers are very reluctant to come to the phone at all and then its only between a very narrow window of hrs in the day. 

Obviously now i am going to always double check regardless, if it makes the tree officer do double the work by repeating exactly what he/ she has already done then well thats just another waste of tax payers money. As long as i hopefully am covered.

 

not sure what else i can say. 

i dont know if the solicitor is correct, i have to assume she is is as that is her job. i wouldnt tell a pilot how to fly when i dont know myself. someone who does this for a living is going to know better than someone who climbs and cuts trees for a living!