TPO in National Park Advice please

[RPA]

Very good advice Kev

 

Do all you can NOT to p people off. Just phone the local NP tree officer and talk to them. Most are from the same plannet as us

[Justme]

Very good advice Kev

 

Do all you can NOT to p people off. Just phone the local NP tree officer and talk to them. Most are from the same plannet as us

 

But when they have already said

 

if I take the trees down they are going to prosecute me and I will need the evidence as defence in court

 

They are already peed off.

 

They have refused to talk or look at the trees.

 

They (NP) have just had some come down & damage the elec cable in the area & had a bill for £k's. So they know that the trees are iffy already.

 

Just seems a funny line to take. Why hide behind the courts when a simple site visit will enable them to see the trees before any action is taken. Then if they still think they do not need to come down the owner can seek other "proofs" that they do & apply / appeal.

 

I guess its coming back to arse covering again. Get some one else to do a report & there insurance to cover it. Then there is no risk to you or your cushy job.

[RPA]

I agree with how you feel, it does seem like they have seen thier arse. Trouble is if they have been taken for £'s by utilities company they may be keen to get some back.

 

I cant see how they can refuse to visit the site, it is thier job after all.

[Amelanchier]

It sounds like the information from the National Park is nearly right.

 

Dangerous trees can be felled without making an application, but the duty of evidence is with the defendent to prove that on the balance of probability that the trees were dangerous. So records such as photos will need to be kept.

 

Alternatively an application can be made to fell the trees because they are dangerous. This will need one written report from one professional to validate the application. The LPA may then ask for frther information (eg picus assessment) but they can't demand it.

 

If the local authority refuse permission you can then appeal to the planning inspectorate. The whole process often takes over a year.

 

If the trees are located on a work site and you have done a risk assessment that shows they should be removed, then contact HSE. They will not want to advise you, but be annoying and persist.

 

I would add to this excellent advice that if the LPA (or NP for that matter) refuse to validate your application on the grounds that the evidence submitted is not sufficient, then you also have the right to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate for non determination if you consider that the application was adequate to determine.

 

There is also provision in the guidance for the LPA to waive the requirement (in writing) for such information if the problem is obvious and undisputed.

 

From the LPA point of view there are two main motives behind this strategy described by the OP -

 

1) Visiting every tree that someone might want to do work to is heavy on resources. Many people simply want a site visit in the hope that they can better argue their point. Often this can involve more people than are strictly necessary - like the concerned neighbours, contractors, solicitors, hitmen etc. Normally an application will have to be made anyway, and determined on its own merits. Given that this application might arrive 6 months after the visit, the TO might have to go out to the site again - especially when the spec has been "tweaked". The policy of "no app = no visit" is not people friendly but might simply be a result of an overworked department.

 

2) Damage limitation - exempt works are often ill defined. "Reduce a limb to make it safe". By waving the big stick of prosecution around, the LPA attempts to ensure that minimum works are undertaken outside of the controls of the application/consent/conditions system. We all know how professional opinion can differ, one mans prune is anothers fell. As the tree managers of a district, city or park; the TO (for better or worse) has to (try to!) consider the wider picture.

[Justme]

Be careful!

 

If you are advising this person as a professional, then you need to make sure you know what you are talking about, and ideally you should have the PI insurance to cover you if it goes wrong.

 

 

As you are advising me & I in a non professional capacity (as I am not qualified to give arb advice) am passing on information that I have "found" on the web, I doubt any court in the land would convict.

 

I did think that this liability thing had been sorted as a few case went to court & all were found in favour of the advice giver as they were not giving the advice in an official fee charging capacity.