Jump to content

Log in or register to remove this advert

  • 2

Is this tree going to die and dangerous


Bigben143
 Share

Question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
  On 19/03/2021 at 22:15, monkeybusiness said:

This thread confuses me - answers aren’t in order so don’t appear to make sense. For clarity I should have quoted the OP’s post that appeared before my (tongue-in-cheek) reply - ‘I'm not trolling I am just seeing if I have done enough that the tree will die. So local council can't keep the pto on the tree as they put the pto on it even seeing that to it’.

(I should make it clear that any ‘advice’ I put forward on this or any other Internet forums should only ever be taken with a pinch of salt).

Apologies for any confusion, or appearing to take myself too seriously...

Expand  

It's OK mate,  I just voted your answer up! 🤣

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Log in or register to remove this advert

  • 0

Has the original post been drastically edited such that a load of info has been removed?

 

There seems to be a million more times the info /  assumption  / opinion in the various answers than can possibly be derived from what I can see as the OP?

 

(but from what can be read, This looks like a wind-up or the behaviour / actions of a Neanderthal)

Edited by kevinjohnsonmbe
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
  On 20/03/2021 at 18:04, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

Has the original post been drastically edited such that a load of info has been removed?

 

There seems to be a million more times the info /  assumption  / opinion in the various answers than can possibly be derived from what I can see as the OP?

 

(but from what can be read, This looks like a wind-up or the behaviour / actions of a Neanderthal)

Expand  

It's the combined info from all the ops posts. If you set it to sort by date then you can see all his replies in order explaining what he did 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
  On 20/03/2021 at 18:09, Bolt said:

Nope.

 

It was pretty brief.

Expand  

 

  On 20/03/2021 at 18:11, Paddy1000111 said:

It's the combined info from all the ops posts. If you set it to sort by date then you can see all his replies in order explaining what he did 

Expand  

 

  On 20/03/2021 at 18:12, Bolt said:

 

I think that came from the Original Posters next 17 comments.

Expand  

That clears that up then. 
 

He’s obviously a knuckle dragger. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
  On 20/03/2021 at 18:31, Paul in the woods said:

That's a bit harsh. From what I can gather from the posts council used to own the tree and the land it was on. Council have not looked after trees on the land and not compensated anyone when they dropped limbs causing £1,000s of damage. Council offered to remove tree if the home owner paid.

 

Home owner ended up buying the land from the council, council did not TPO tree. When the home owner started getting quotes to fell the council got wind and decided to TPO. I assumed one of the arborists enquired with the council about a TPO and that's why they acted? Again I assume some how the home owner got wind of the council getting wind and decided to ring bark said tree. (I've seen that suggested by people here before).

 

Sadly I doubt we'll find out exactly what happened and the outcome.

Expand  

There’s a lot of assumptions there mate. 
 

I can hardly make any sense of the thread the way it’s all jumbled up in order of what has been said. 
 

Im no fan of misplaced LA inappropriate application of TPOs (or lazy ‘public amenity’ catch-all refusals of work schedules) but that’s not to say I’ve seen anything here that makes any sense so far - apart from those comments that say careful how you (OP) carry on. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
  On 20/03/2021 at 23:00, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

There’s a lot of assumptions there mate. 
 

I can hardly make any sense of the thread the way it’s all jumbled up in order of what has been said. 
 

Im no fan of misplaced LA inappropriate application of TPOs (or lazy ‘public amenity’ catch-all refusals of work schedules) but that’s not to say I’ve seen anything here that makes any sense so far - apart from those comments that say careful how you (OP) carry on. 

Expand  

 

I certainly agree with the advice and I'm often pleasantly surprised how helpful some members are here. I would also add to that a warning to the OP that it's not unheard of for cash strapped councils to fight lost causes.

 

However, unlike others who've ignored what the OP said or assumed they'll lying and condemned them I've assumed they've been fairly truthful and can easily understand why they did what they did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


  •  

  • Featured Adverts

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Read more  

Follow us

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.