Boundary trees to be cut by neighbour

[Rough Cutter]

49 minutes ago, peds said:

Speaking as someone who is not well-versed in the whole shrinkage situation, this sounds like a steaming pile of horseshit to me.

 

Just to clarify... the complaint is that the corners by the swimming pool and the cedar tree are being affected? 

 

How old is the swimming pool?

 

I'm happy to be told I'm wrong, I like learning, but at this stage I'd probably be giving the neighbours a big old f*ck-you until you can prove that it's my 4 tiny trees doing the damage. They need to get a specialist in and a proper report made.

It does look like a load of bollocks...

[eanswythe]

Yes the bit by the swimming pool and the bit by the cedar tree are listed as affected.

The swimming pool and the extension date from the mid seventies and were put in after the house was built. there was previously a mature holm oak in the neighbours back garden by their grass area which had to be removed along with a number of their evergreen lining their wall to shield view of their garden from the double decker buses that pass. 

[GarethM]

Endlessly discussing it isn't going to get things anywhere.

 

Personally it's their dime, let them have at it.

Yeah, they might be morons, but they have the money to obviously be utter morons.

 

Otherwise, you can call their bluff but is it worth the risk of legal expense, let them do it and you can sit smugly when it continues to go south.

 

Just to put it into perspective.

 

I went to war with my neighbour over where he put his bins out - now I'm bankrupt with a £1million legal bill | Daily Mail Online

WWW.DAILYMAIL.CO.UK

---

Geoff Carter, 77, first went to war with his farmer neighbour Trevor Goldsworthy over the weekly bin collections in rural west...

 

 

[kram]

Good drawing, helps a lot understanding the layout. Sunlight will play nearly no part of this as the trees are to the north west of them, but will be blocking your morning and afternoon sunlight, if Im reading it correctly.

 

Please could you also get a photo showing the height of your trees, plus a rough guess in meters for each.

 

Removing the trees might cause you to have ground movement issues.

Their money would be better spent fixing their problems, drainage, foundations etc rather than removing trees. I'd guess the extensive boulding work of extensions and the pool might be more to blame.

 

Whilst you could have them do an arborist survey to map the roots it would likely be more beneficial to have them do a surveyor specialising in ground movement to examine it. I suggest you demand to see a report made by a relevant profession explaining in detail, why the trees are causing the issue and what should be done to remedy it. Its no good if somone has just guessed the trees and thats their first try.

 

You can say you want to see the report and get a second opinion, and if it does highlight a real problem, only then you will give permission.

[maybelateron]

As Mick Dempsey said early in the thread the neighbour's big cedar looks like it needs to go. I would really struggle to take them seriously if they think the cedar can stay but your trees need to go. Also, later comment of asking them to get a structural engineer survey and to show it to you, is the least they should be prepared to do. Unless, of course, you are happy for them to just get on and pay for your trees to be removed. They do sound like awkward neighbours to me.

[Steven P]

As above, pragmatically, the 2 'evergreens' are quite tall from the photos, and it might be a blessing to have them removed at someone elses expense... especially if you can wangle some other form of barrier there. Not sure about the other 2 trees, however if they weren't my thoughts would be "prove it" before they do anything.

 

Do you have any fondness for the other 2 trees? Would you be upset if they were to be removed at anothers expense? If not for neighbour relations go for it... but fight to maybe get the fence renewed and some other form of barrier planting? Second opinion and so on might give you some room for negotiations.

 

However a few times over the last few years "foundations cracking... on the new extension... old house is fine" story (might be wrong but that's how I am reading it)... points to the buildings lacking with foundations given the neighbouring trees. What is the time scale for the trees? Which came first, pool, extension, trees?

 

 

End of the day though, what would be your best solution here? I think from your original question you might have grounds for some improvements - screen or whatever, some landscaping - as compensation for the 'lack of amenity' from loosing the trees

[eanswythe]

I think you are all very wise.  So thank you. So shall it be...

First I have to tell the Tree surgeons I will be going back with a new query to Innovation and please wait to hear from them.

Second: Tell Innovation group have had new independent advice and 

a) still agree removal of 2 Leylandi

b) cherry tree stays unless can prove it is a real problem (?)

c) thin pine tree stays as in close proximity to yew trees which are not deemed a problem (fight for this )

d) would like compensation for lack of pleasure of privacy and enjoyment of aminity.  Loss of bird life in the garden will be significant. 

e) replacement or compensation for any plant/dry stone wall damage

f) New fencing as once the trees are cut the fence is easily breached and  this property will be left at significant risk of robbery.

Sound good to you guys?

[eanswythe]

Only magpies and crows visit the cedar tree...we have abundance bird life including yellowhammers and sometimes one of the local perigrines who seems to favour the cherry tree.

[Mick Dempsey]

Peregrines? You sure about that?

[spudulike]

20 minutes ago, Mick Dempsey said:

Peregrines? You sure about that?

Usually only seen around church/cathedral spires around here being the tallest cliff like structures available. More likely sparrowhawk's in the average UK garden.