Unlawful work to TPO'd tree

[Chris at eden]

1 hour ago, hedge mong said:

Earn it yourself by going into your council office and ask to see the bill if it's on there property 

The open space isn’t adopted according to the OP so not council owned.  Councils only adopt a POS once the development is complete and as long as it meets the required standard.  Loads end up left with the developer which seems to be what has happened here. Sometimes the developers cease trading and the land reverts to the crown and becomes a right pain in the ass as no one will take responsibility. 

[AHPP]

1 hour ago, Chris at eden said:

The cautions stay on file with the council in case you breach the TPO again in future.  The council are the. Enforcing agent for TPO contravention, not the CPS. 
 

But is it a caution with equivalent legal power to one the police or CPS can give or is it just something called a caution? 

[hedge mong]

Well if the trees on no man's land go firewood it up and put this moaning minie out of his misery

[dumper]

51 minutes ago, hedge mong said:

Well if the trees on no man's land go firewood it up and put this moaning minie out of his misery

Do you live in Scotland ?

[Chris at eden]

11 hours ago, AHPP said:

But is it a caution with equivalent legal power to one the police or CPS can give or is it just something called a caution? 

Not sure what you mean. What power does a police caution give?  It’s just a warning instead of prosecution.  If you do it again it can be used against you for prosecution. Not sure what else it does. 
 

The LPA has to follow the same procedure.  To issue a caution the offender must already have admitted to the crime. You must have enough evidence to prosecute. And it must be in the public interest. If they refuse the caution you have to prosecute.  You can’t use it as a deal to get someone to admit guilt for a lesser punishment. 
 

the LPA follow all the same rules in terns of investigation. PACE, RIPA, etc.  so I assume it’s the same for this as well.  The PACE interviews are pretty tightly controlled or at least they should be. They are all recorded and conducted under caution. You should have the PACE guidance on the desk.  All that hammering the interviewee you see on the tv isn’t allowed. You can’t raise you voice. You can’t stand up. These things can be seen as intimidating and used against you in court. If you move and the chair squeaks on the floor you have to state on the tape what the noise was and confirm that you have remained seated. It not a half arsed thing that the LPA do.  I hated doing prosecutions when I worked as TO.  It’s not particularly nice. 
 

Not sure if that answers your question. 

[Chris at eden]

1 hour ago, hedge mong said:

Well if the trees on no man's land go firewood it up and put this moaning minie out of his misery

Two problems here.  
 

1.  Someone built a housing estate there recently. It can’t be unregistered. It’s either withe the developer or transferred with one of the houses. Or with the LA and the OP has it wrong. 
 

2.  Ownership makes absolutely no difference to prosecution. It’s still a criminal offence. The LPA can still prosecute the tree surgeon and the person instructing the works  even if they don’t own it.  
 

[AHPP]

[daltontrees]

19 hours ago, AHPP said:

Do councils have cautioning powers for TPO offences? A proper caution that goes on your proper record like the filth can give, not some lesser or non-existent legal thing that calls itself a caution. Are (criminal) TPO offences brought as private prosecutions by councils or do they go through the usual Crown Prosecution Service/Procurator Fiscal channel?

I have heard of people being interviewed under caution for TPO transgressions and it going on their record. I don't know that there is a specific statutory power or process for trees.

The 'caution' is not a telling-off and admonishment. The caution is the 'anything you say may be used in evidence against you' thing, in other words prosecution may ensue and admissible evidence is being gathered, including the interview. It's never happened to me,  but what I have heard it appears on your record as if and admonishment, so it is to be avoided. Mynors covers it a bit at 26-37 et seq. He indicates that it isn't just police who are bound to issue a caution before interview, Council officers are too, if they want to rely on what is said or not said in a subsequent prosecution.

Agan, I have no first hand experience but have heard of the interview being used to scare and chastise the witness into not doing it again. I suppose it could only be taken into account in a subsequent offence if the record of the interview showed admission of guilt and then admonishment (reprimand).

Most TPO offences are strict liability offences, you can't get reprimanded, you are either fined or are not guilty. But there may be exceptions to that. If indicted it's a whole lot more serious and admonishment without fine is theoretically possible.  

As I say, thankfully I have not had direct experience but a lifetime isn't long enough to learn from direct experience and we all have to top it up with indirect.

So in the contect of this thread, I meant thagt the Council may or may not prefer to interview someone under caution (as an opportunity to reprimand) rather than prosecute.

[daltontrees]

17 hours ago, hedge mong said:

Mature tree reduction on public property.

Easy to find out who authorized the work and also who paid the bill

You won't get anywhere moaning about it and if the cuts are done nicely the tree will be ok.

There isn't one scrap of land on this island we live on that isn't managed in one way or another so STFU and enjoy the remaining trees that are being looked after

Excuse me, who are you telling to STFU, and do you really think that it adds weight to your argument?

[daltontrees]

14 hours ago, Chris at eden said:

The cautions stay on file with the council in case you breach the TPO again in future.  The council are the. Enforcing agent for TPO contravention, not the CPS. 
 

Chris see my reply to AHPP, I don't know that there's such a thing as a 'caution'. It might strictly speakino be called a 'reprimand on interview under caution'. Happy to be proved wrong.