Neighbour has requested removal of my 160 year old Copper Beech (TPO/AONB/Conservation area)

[MarkII]

Neighbours house built in the 1970's, the attached garage is within a couple of metres of the tree, which would have been over 100 years old when the house was built. Built on clay sloping away from the tree and with 6ft retaining walls other side of the property and another large Beech tree on that side.

No damage or subsidence occurred until suffering cracking during last 6 months of 2022. (ABI has identified 2022 as the worst subsidence claims issue UK wide since 2006 - due to drought)

My neighbours claims management company appointed structural engineers and an arborist to assess the situation.

The cracking in the house appears to be in the middle of the house which is away from my tree and from the movement assessment, the main movement seems to be at the opposite end of the property with next to no movement right next to the tree. 

The first course of action is to insist on the tree's removal with an aggressive couple of letters. 

The engineer reports suggest that the tree 'contributes' to the issue, not suggesting it is the main cause however the arborist states the tree as the main cause. Also mentioned by the engineer is that the house has insufficient foundations and once the tree removed, will require further monitoring and probably underpinning anyway.

 

Does anyone experienced any similar situations and can offer any advice/guidance i.e. how fast do Beech's grow? Are there any alternatives to removing/can it be chopped back bit to reduce water consumption without losing it's stature? If it is removed, is it likely to cause more issues as it's 160 year old root base declines? (I am estimating it's age based on Mitchells rule with a girth of 330cm)

We're in an AONB, conservation areas and the tree has a TPO on it, in addition to being widely loved by the community (applied to have it dead-wooded and the parish council turned up at my door!) and is visible throughout the valley when in leaf.

Just feels like the insurer is trying to offload the liability onto my insurance and remove this grand old copper Beech to try to avoid paying for fixing the insufficient foundations, any advice or guidance would be gratefully received!

 

Pics show the tree in question, the attached double garage of the neighbours on the right

 

Many thanks

Mark

 

Edited December 16, 2023 by MarkII

[aswales]

My house is on a concrete raft not strip foundation, I'm talking about the tree not having any effect in my own situation, cracks are small and not subsidence cracks...

[aswales]

Mark, have you got free  legal advice on as part of your own home insurance ?  From what your post says -  the engineers report says the foundations are insufficient...Have the engineer or arborist dug or core drilled any holes in the ground to substantiate aspects of their reports ?

[manco]

On 16/12/2023 at 19:46, peds said:

What a beauty, lucky to have a tree like that in your garden.

 

I can't offer any specific advice on the tree situation, but keep in mind that if you wee on a plate or a baking tray then freeze it, you'll have a handy disc of frozen piss that can easily be dropped through your neighbour's letterbox in the middle of the night, whereupon it'll melt into his carpet.

 

Good luck!

wash the tray before you bake cookies though, yeah?

[dumper]

Would like to know how the arborist is sure it’s the tree, if the qualified engineer  is not 

[Mark Bolam]

It’s not the tree.

It’s the fuckwits who built the garage near a 100 year old tree.

[peds]

6 hours ago, daltontrees said:

Someone's house, possibly their biggest investment in life and the roof over their heads, is subsiding. It might cost ten grand to fix. They're probably worried sick. Their insurer have taken up the case for them. The tree owner is now worried too and naturally wants to keep the tree. It might cost him thousands if he's unlucky. So he registers for Arbtalk to be able to get some reassurances, presumably thinking that professionally minded and helpful people might be found here.

But the second bit of advice he gets here is to piss on the neighbour's carpet anonymously. Sick, and in no situation a proportionate or appropriate action.

Seriously, get a grip of yourself. It's you that needs to lighten up (as well as grow up).

 

Ah jeez, I think the fella can distinguish between some serious professional advice and some good-natured commiserations over the behaviour of what is clearly a Grade A bell-end neighbour, especially when the first sentence of my reply designates it as such. I'm sorry my, admittedly, rather crude reply got your knickers in a twist, but maybe you shouldn't put such a high expectation on everything you read on the Internet, which is a famously varied and occasionally smutty place. And embarrassed by the arb industry my foot, I speak not as a representative for our exalted profession, but for no-one but myself, as someone who was lucky enough to move around a lot in my younger years and has lived next door to psychopaths, angels, and everything in-between.

 

So when someone says that the first line of action from the other party is a couple of aggressive letters and a whole can of legal worms being opened instead of a concerned-but-amicable word over the garden fence, yeah, I'm going to take sides pretty quickly. To the OP, I'm sorry if my suggestion didn't fit the mood of the situation as you are currently experiencing it, and I'd like you to know that I don't genuinely believe that pissing through your neighbour's letterbox will bring about any significant resolution to your problem. But I suspect you already knew that. 

[peds]

2 hours ago, manco said:

wash the tray before you bake cookies though, yeah?

Yeah, course. We aren't philistines. 

[aswales]

found this

https://www.labc.co.uk/news/foundations-clay-soil

 

the section "The trouble with trees" worth reading, if I was fighting this one I'd probably reference this

[MarkII]

Thanks for all the comments/thoughts, including the light hearted one which as an adult, I took in jest 😉

I am on very good terms with my neighbour, lovely elderly lady. She's rightly concerned and we both want her house issues rectified.

Latter part of 2022 had the highest rate of subsidence claims in the UK since 2006 so whilst the tree clearly takes moisture, the drought was the primary cause, arguably the movement would have occurred anyway. Removing the tree will not resolve the issue and could cause more issues!

My own insurers don't want to get involved until all the work is completed and my neighbours insurers attempt a recovery. 

In my mind that is too late, if I remove the tree then that could be interpreted as an acceptance of liability, hence why I am looking into establishing it as a contributor not the root cause (excuse the pun) and get them to accept the liability/repair her house rather than elongate the while situation with tree removal, further monitoring for god knows how long, then deal with heave and underpinning anyway.

There has been 11 months of movement monitoring with all movement on the opposite side of the property where the slope goes away from the house, its dropped then risen as the recent wet weather has soaked the clay.

Its normally very wet here and the property has a retaining wall on the other side down the slope and also another similar age large beech Though not as close.

I will engage with the TO and see what protection the existing TPO provides, last resort is the local village community and their pitchforks.....

[MarkII]

17 hours ago, aswales said:

Mark, have you got free  legal advice on as part of your own home insurance ?  From what your post says -  the engineers report says the foundations are insufficient...Have the engineer or arborist dug or core drilled any holes in the ground to substantiate aspects of their reports ?

I have and unfortunately they are as useful as my core insurer, don't want to know until civil action taken against me.

Yeah they have completed ground core samples, the garage foundations are only 0.6m and found no roots beyond 1.6m, the main house core slightly further away had foundations to 1.1m and no roots beyond 2.1m, all soft to firm silty clay.

Feels like tree is easy target though unlikely to resolve what is an issue with insufficient foundations on a fluctuating clay base