How to have a TPO removed?

[Mark Bolam]

10 minutes ago, Dirk Pitt said:

If I am aware of a problem, I want to deal with it now, not in 5 weeks. I do not want to risk upsetting my neighbours.  I do not know why you have introduced "special case" as I do not recall me saying I was although many times I have been told " you are the only one". 

 

 

I came here asking about a process for removing a TPO, there have been a number of replies about putting in an application and the 5 weeks wait and telling my neighbours about the process but these do not answer the question.

I get the feeling there is a reluctance to see a TPO removed and a mistrust of anyone wanting to remove one.  Even though I think the thread has run its course and the answer now found I'm being told it is not up to me when to end a thread. I am on another forum and I see once the answer is there people keep adding to it and I find myself asking why, what is the point?

 

Sorry if I have upset anyone.

 

Hopefully the link I put in to a post earlier this evening will be of use to others.

 

Dirk Pitt

 

It’s not useful tbh Dirk.

 

We all knew already.

[Doug Tait]

To be fair Mark, it was quite useful. It helped Dirk understand why people kept advising him to make an application and explain to his neighbours about there being an established process to follow.

[Mark Bolam]

Oh right.

So he’s wasted 9 pages of us telling him that when he had access to the info all along?

 

I feel used Doug, used.

[daltontrees]

What a bizare thread.

 

There is a long tradition on Arbtalk of not actually answering the question, at least not deliberately or directly.

 

So for what it's worth I will try. There is no formal process to apply for the removal of a TPO. The Council has power to revoke TPO's. In England (unlike in the more civilised northern provinces) there is no obligation to review existing TPOs either, so it's probably not going to happen unless instigated by a tree owner. The owner can ask. The Council may not be arsed about it, but may consider it. The criterion would have to be the same as why it was made in the first place, namely (and again this is only in the uncivilised southern parts of the UK) for the amenity of the area.

 

The area character or the visibility of the trees may have changed considerably since the Order was made, so there may be gounds for revoking the Order. But I expect any Council faced with a request to revoke an Order would probably presume that it's because the owner wants to remove it and expects that an application for consent to do so would be refused.

 

I act for a planning authority sometimes and they are reviewing their Orders cyclically. Another planning authority I have dealings with have an Order which is 65 years old and the trees named in it aren't even there any more, but the Order subsists.

 

One can only ask for revokation or hope for a cyclical review, but don't expect anything...

Edited October 14, 2022 by daltontrees

[Mick Dempsey]

You’ve posted on this thread since page 1 Jules.

 

Not sure why you now decide to give the definitive answer.

I think the OP wanted it revoked because he thought it would adversely impact the price/sale of the property. 
 

Whole thing never made a lick of sense from the start.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 14, 2022 by Mick Dempsey

[daltontrees]

1 hour ago, Mick Dempsey said:

You’ve posted on this thread since page 1 Jules.

 

Not sure why you now decide to give the definitive answer.

I think the OP wanted it revoked because he thought it would adversely impact the price/sale of the property. 
 

Whole thing never made a lick of sense from the start.

 

Answering now because I said I would but didn't get round to it. The answer's the answer no matter who asked the question or why.

 

It is easy to get distracted by speculating about an OP's motives. Call me an anorak, but I'm really only interested in learning and disseminating knowledge. As is often the case when a question is asked on Arbtalk I am dismayed if I don't know the answer and I feel the professional need to go off immediately and research it properly. Then I know, and I think why not share that with others? I am tortured soul.

[Mick Dempsey]

I think Mark Bolam said it, we all knew already.

 

What was really interesting was the subtext in the thread.

[Mark Bolam]

Missed this Mick, sorry.

 

Merry Christmas mate.

[Ian C]

On 07/10/2022 at 06:42, Mick Dempsey said:

I don’t really care much for TPOs, but I’m getting rather fond of this one.

Hope it’s a keeper!

Do you have many restrictions over in France Mick when it comes to trees?

[Mick Dempsey]

4 minutes ago, Ian C said:

Do you have many restrictions over in France Mick when it comes to trees?

Very few, certainly next to none in domestic arb.

No TPOs, if they’re your trees you do what you like.