What would you do???

[slippery]

nice fungus pics, can anyone id?

[Ian C]

nice fungus pics, can anyone id?

 

Its flamulina velutipes

[ukminch]

Lots of different LA's have different views as to what constitutes a "dying" tree, and if you're seen to have got it wrong, the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that the tree was exempt.

 

 

 

I'd disagree with you there. If they are going to prosecute then they need to have proof. You are innocent until proven guilty.

 

I'd submit a 5day notice and get on with it. They'll let you know soon enough if they don't think it's appropriate, although the 5 day notice is more of a courtesy than anything else

 

R

[skyhuck]

Do you think they're about to fall over?

 

No but a big lump could fall off!!!

 

I had a HC very similar to these but bigger, I told the house holder to email the TO giving 5 days notice. He sent her one back saying the tree was not to be touched!!!

 

A week later a large limb fell off narrowly missing the clients car, the TO then sent her a letter saying she had 7 days to get if felled!!!

[White Noise]

I would take pics and fell under DDD, but speak to the TO and make sure he sees them before you fell and agrees with you.

 

Sounds about right . How did you get on ?

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

My (perosnal) view, based on the photo's posted is that there's probably adeqaute evdience to support removal as an exemeption under 'DDD', and I would always recommend a 5 day notice be submitted to the LPA.

 

However, there is a view that if the tree(s) are unlikley to fail within the application determintaion period, i.e. 8 weeks ('yeah, right!'), then it may be better so to do.

 

the trouble with this of course is that it risks 'residential/political' intereference which may (bizzarely) result in a refusal of consent = scuppered!

 

There, that's a definitive answer then...NOT! Personally I'd recommend speaking to the Tree Officer concerned and take thier advice as to best to proceed BUT bearing in mind you are providing a service to your client and you need to best represent their interest too.

 

Hence be well informed about the tree, its current condition, the likely prognosis, the future development (odds on 'Armellaria' will finish it off) AND the legislation. PLUS remind the TO that IF you remove as 'DDD' he gets an automatic replacement...and make it a nice offer, maybe even '2-4-1' (BUT you're not obliged to do so AND he/she can't enforce even if you offer it.)

 

Hope this to be of use (some?!)

Cheers..

Paul

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

I'd disagree with you there. If they are going to prosecute then they need to have proof. You are innocent until proven guilty.

 

I'd submit a 5day notice and get on with it. They'll let you know soon enough if they don't think it's appropriate, although the 5 day notice is more of a courtesy than anything else

 

R

 

Sorry if I'm off the mark here but, bizzarely, the TPO legilsation works 'a*se about face' in that, if challneged by the LPA, you're actually guilty until you prove innocence...hence lots of piccies and knowledge!!!

Cheers..

Paul

 

PS Wow...a brief reply...from me!!!!

[ScottF]

I'd disagree with you there. If they are going to prosecute then they need to have proof. You are innocent until proven guilty.

 

I'd submit a 5day notice and get on with it. They'll let you know soon enough if they don't think it's appropriate, although the 5 day notice is more of a courtesy than anything else

 

R

 

Guilty until proven innocent in this case, I'm afraid.

 

As it says on the TPO guide:

 

" 6.7 If work is carried out on a protected tree under this exemption (or any of the other exemptions listed below), the burden of proof to show, on the balance of probabilities, that the tree was dead, dying or dangerous rests with the defendant."

 

The 5 day notification is there to keep unscrupulous people from felling trees

which are, for example, constraining a development, and then claiming the tree was "knackered" (if I had a quid for every time a developer told me to say that a tree was "knackered" I'd be loaded).

 

As for the tree in the picture being exempt from the TPO, it may well qualify, but the LA might rather it was deadwooded or pollarded while a replacement gets established. I just find that the implementation of the DDD guidance is so patchy it's just easier to document the case and jump through the hoops. If there's a massive lump of dead wood in the tree that's likely to fall off, ask the TO on the phone (maybe email a pic) if you can remove the limb, or put some barrier tape around the tree.

[Mesterh]

Its all a bit silly though. No TO is going to want to save those trees so why not just tell you to get em down.

 

1 photo should be more than enough evidence IMO.(I know it wont though)

 

Plus why should you have to submit a report at extra cost to the client never mind having to wait another 6 or so weeks.

[skyhuck]

If there's a massive lump of dead wood in the tree that's likely to fall off, ask the TO on the phone (maybe email a pic) if you can remove the limb, or put some barrier tape around the tree.

 

You do not need permission to remove dead wood.