TPO tree fell in the storm yesterday

[Mesterh]

5 hours ago, Mark J said:

You should probably get in touch with your insurance company.

That and so should your neighbour.

Hopefully it landed on enough things (fences, sheds etc) that the cost of removal will be covered. 

[Khriss]

The Grim tree reeper has had a busy weekend 😉 K

[Mark J]

9 minutes ago, Johnelle said:

We did have a full tree inspection which should be an attachment to the above link.

The DC apparently read this report (and took little notice of it??)

There's no link to the actual report there.

Did you make a new application to fell the tree on the basis that it had been inspected and was found to pose a risk of whole tree failure?



I hope you get it sorted. 


 

[Chris at eden]

53 minutes ago, Johnelle said:

We did have a full tree inspection which should be an attachment to the above link.

The DC apparently read this report (and took little notice of it??)

I haven’t seen the tree report or application but if the detail on the decision notice is correct then the council have not ignored the report. They have considered your reasons, low amenity and the inconvenience of suckers and refused the application as they consider them insufficient. 
 

The decision seems to indicate that the report states that there is no foreseeable risk of tree failure. If this is correct the council is unlikely to be at fault here.  You can’t claim against the council for tree failure when your evidence submitted to the council says there is no risk.  Your application and appeal do not appear to relate to risk of failure. 
 

Like I said, this is based on limited info so don’t take it as professional advice. I haven’t looked at all the documents, the site, or the tree but based on this limited info my initial thoughts would be that the council are probably not at fault.  You should probably get it looked at prior to clearing. 
 

Re the stump. If it’s still alive then it probably is still protected, it’s a weird approach though.  It has no visual amenity, it’s a stump!   If they just let you clear the whole thing you would be required in accordance with section 206 of the town and country planning act 1990 to replace it and the new one would be automatically protected with no need to vary.  If they insist that the stump is protected and you have to submit an app to grind it out you could say no, I’ll keep the stump and trim suckers as per your previous advice, subject to app. In theory.  Like I said, weird approach. 
 

cheers. 
 

chris 

[Baldbloke]

https://meetings.westoxon.gov.uk/documents/s2829/Item 06 - TPO Report - Tithings Station Road Shipton under Wychwood.pdf
This is the council’s reply to our second application which mentions applying topsoil to cover the suckers
 

Point 5. Suggests over Financial Considerations that financial recompense may be considered due to damage caused by the TPO.
Maybe time to let your insurers loose on the Council?

[Baldbloke]

I haven’t seen the tree report or application but if the detail on the decision notice is correct then the council have not ignored the report. They have considered your reasons, low amenity and the inconvenience of suckers and refused the application as they consider them insufficient. 
 
The decision seems to indicate that the report states that there is no foreseeable risk of tree failure. If this is correct the council is unlikely to be at fault here.  You can’t claim against the council for tree failure when your evidence submitted to the council says there is no risk.  Your application and appeal do not appear to relate to risk of failure. 
 
Like I said, this is based on limited info so don’t take it as professional advice. I haven’t looked at all the documents, the site, or the tree but based on this limited info my initial thoughts would be that the council are probably not at fault.  You should probably get it looked at prior to clearing. 
 
Re the stump. If it’s still alive then it probably is still protected, it’s a weird approach though.  It has no visual amenity, it’s a stump!   If they just let you clear the whole thing you would be required in accordance with section 206 of the town and country planning act 1990 to replace it and the new one would be automatically protected with no need to vary.  If they insist that the stump is protected and you have to submit an app to grind it out you could say no, I’ll keep the stump and trim suckers as per your previous advice, subject to app. In theory.  Like I said, weird approach. 
 
cheers. 
 
chris 

Seem to remember the potential failure of the tree and where it could hit (the listed building) was mentioned in the initial application to counter the TPO.

[dumper]

3 hours ago, Johnelle said:

https://meetings.westoxon.gov.uk/documents/s2829/Item 06 - TPO Report - Tithings Station Road Shipton under Wychwood.pdf

This is the council’s reply to our second application which mentions applying topsoil to cover the suckers

 

Can someone explain paragraph five does this mean the council should pay for damage?

[Johnelle]

Re Chris’ reply, the stump/trunk is currently horizontal - hopefully they wouldn’t maintain the TPO on this!

[Chris at eden]

11 hours ago, Baldbloke said:

Seem to remember the potential failure of the tree and where it could hit (the listed building) was mentioned in the initial application to counter the TPO.

You mean the initial objection to the TPO.  Didn’t realise this was the same one as from a while ago.  Even so, the objection was made by a laymen who then obtained a report from a professional who said the tree was ok.  Seems reasonable for council to apply more weight to the experts report than the laymen’s comments.  Seems that the expert didn’t think that the lean was an issue and we haven’t seen enough to say whether or not we agree.  
 

Thing is, everyone is assuming the failure was foreseeable. It may not have been, even defect trees fail if the winds are strong enough.  The council would use this in court. They would say that their own appointed expert said the tree was ok. 
 

[Chris at eden]

9 minutes ago, Johnelle said:

Re Chris’ reply, the stump/trunk is currently horizontal - hopefully they wouldn’t maintain the TPO on this!

You would hop not.