Neighbors insurance insist I remove 150 y.o. Oak

[Mr. D]

I’ve recently bought a house in Northwest London, with several tall trees on property. One of them is a 20m+ oak.

One of the things we have inherited from the seller is a long standing dispute with the neighbor, whose insurance company insists that this oak is the cause of subsidence under their garage. 
in our purchase agreement, the seller provided us with funds to meet the demands of the insurance company. We convinced the insurance company to let us pollard the entire tree, rather than cut it to stump which is what they had originally demanded. 
now that we have finished the Pollard in, they insist that actually the tree needs to be reduced by half, that we remove the entire crown and cut it to the halfway point. 
As there is no proof that this tree causes sub, only their insistence of the risk of possibility, we are loathe to destroy such a majestic old tree. 
now I have received a notice saying that if I don’t respond to them with a commitment to act within the next seven days they will take legal action against us. 

unfortunately the tree is not listed or protected by our council. 
Any advice on how I can save my tree?

 

Edited August 5, 2022 by Mr. D

[john87]

26 minutes ago, Retired Climber said:

I don't mean this in a derogatory way, and I'm not taking a cheap dig, so please take this question in the spirit it's written. Do you have much experience with the law, courts, and what happens in the English legal system? 

Hey, i know that you are not having a dig at all, you come across as a decent bloke. Nope, never been sued, hope i never am too! Never had to sue anyone either..

 

All i am saying is, look at all the things you see in the paper where neighbours have decided to sue each other. There is usually only one winner; Neither of them..

 

An insurance company is not in the business of losing money. If they did not think they would win, they would not be commencing legal action. You do not need to be a lawyer to work that out..

 

john..

[Stubby]

1 minute ago, john87 said:

Hey, i know that you are not having a dig at all, you come across as a decent bloke. Nope, never been sued, hope i never am too! Never had to sue anyone either..

 

All i am saying is, look at all the things you see in the paper where neighbours have decided to sue each other. There is usually only one winner; Neither of them..

 

An insurance company is not in the business of losing money. If they did not think they would win, they would not be commencing legal action. You do not need to be a lawyer to work that out..

 

john..

Sometimes the " threat " of legal action is enough to bully someone not all together up on the law to comply even if the so called " legal action " is not intended in the first place .

[Doug Tait]

Threats are how these people operate, same as any Utility Company, Government/Council, TV Licence, it's the go to tactic.

 

Years ago my boiler packed in, no cash to repair so went without. As it was the only Gas appliance my usage stopped, I told them I wouldn't be using Gas in the future. Years later I came home to a notice taped to the door, enforcement for non payment of thousands, they'd changed the meter due to me allegedly tampering with it. The threats escalated until eventually I responded asking for the Independent Laboratory Report to prove the meter was tampered with (which Gov. say they must provide before enforcement commences) and years later I've never heard a peep.

 

If I'd of been worried by all their words and rolled over I'd have paid several thousand pounds just because they told me to.

 

In the OP's case I'd not consider even discussing it until they have supplied Independent proof that my tree is causing the specific problem. 

[john87]

Be interesting if the OP gets back to say what happens in a few weeks.. I hope they do anyway..

 

john..

[Mr. Squirrel]

I'd be inclined to agree with those saying to request proof of their claims. Without that their case is baseless. 

I'm not familiar with the tree, property, the local soil etc. but there's no reason why a mature tree shouldn't be present within a small garden, indeed assuming it's in good structural condition I'd regard it as an asset, personally... 

[daltontrees]

This is one of those 'light blue touch paper and retire' posts, isn't it, where a punter joins arbtalk, asks a question then buggers off never to be heard from again, leaving behind a squabble of speculation.

Edited August 21, 2022 by daltontrees

[peatff]

On 21/08/2022 at 18:08, daltontrees said:

This is one of those 'light blue touch paper and retire' posts, isn't it, where a punter joins arbtalk, asks a question then buggers off never to be heard from again, leaving behind a squabble of speculation.

 

I've read the first page and jumped to the end and come to the conclusion I don't really care what happens and the garage or tree could fall down as long as I'm not in it. 😋

[Khriss]

Oddly the other Tall trees are not mentioned in this ?... Wonder why not. Am doing a few claims like this, frankly their tree reports are bollocks, possibly they test them out here 😉 K