Law on overhanging trees?

[treequip]

Overhanging branches come under the tort of nuisance.

 

Statutory protection notwithstanding you have the common law right to cut back to the boundary.

 

The word nuisance is the legal sense. You can ask the owner of the tree to abate (stop) the nuisance but they only have to act if the nuisance is causing damage and then they only need to do the minimum required to stop the damage. For example if an overhanging branch were damaging roofing the tree owner would need to cut the branch back but only far enough to stop the damage.

 

The owner of the tree is entitled to the benefits of the tree so anything you cut off belongs to them. Chucking them from whence they came is unacceptable if it does damage. Best practice would be to offer them back although poor neighbour relations sometimes prevent this. Removing the arising’s is theft, however the courts would probably consider this de minimis (not worth the bother of the courts)

 

Entering the other persons land to carry out the works is trespass and not recommended, however unless you cause damage (other than the pruning) it is a civil offence and there is little the owner can do about it except tell you to leave. If you refused they can use reasonable force to make you leave and at that point Plod would get interested.

 

If you access the tree from your client’s side and happen to cross the boundary it is trespass but outside yelling at you or climbing up to get you there is little they can do.

 

Andy

[ad15]

Define maintenance!!!

 

They may have their tree inspected and told no "work required" Would you pay for something that maybe perfectly healthy and not bothering you ?

 

actually the tree officer visited and said the tree should be felled!! but as the planning ap was for reduction and removal of at- risk limbs that what was granted...

 

the point of my question was: should the owner of the tree be paying....he knows it needs doing, he's granted access etc etc, but is not expecting to have to contribute...

 

 

if the next door neighbours chimney fell through my roof,,,, who should pay????

[Gerbutt]

Overhanging branches come under the tort of nuisance.

 

Statutory protection notwithstanding you have the common law right to cut back to the boundary.

 

The word nuisance is the legal sense. You can ask the owner of the tree to abate (stop) the nuisance but they only have to act if the nuisance is causing damage and then they only need to do the minimum required to stop the damage. For example if an overhanging branch were damaging roofing the tree owner would need to cut the branch back but only far enough to stop the damage.

 

The owner of the tree is entitled to the benefits of the tree so anything you cut off belongs to them. Chucking them from whence they came is unacceptable if it does damage. Best practice would be to offer them back although poor neighbour relations sometimes prevent this. Removing the arising’s is theft, however the courts would probably consider this de minimis (not worth the bother of the courts)

 

Entering the other persons land to carry out the works is trespass and not recommended, however unless you cause damage (other than the pruning) it is a civil offence and there is little the owner can do about it except tell you to leave. If you refused they can use reasonable force to make you leave and at that point Plod would get interested.

 

If you access the tree from your client’s side and happen to cross the boundary it is trespass but outside yelling at you or climbing up to get you there is little they can do.

 

Andy

 

Thanks Andy and everyone.

[Rupe]

If cutting back to the boundary line is going to leave stubs then you are carryign out improper tree work. "lopping" I think its called.

 

If the tree is in a conservation area then you still need permision for crown lift/thin/reduction etc and work to be carried out to BS etc. So cutting to an imaginary line is not ideal.

 

A good solution, if you can, is to remove branches beyond the boundary line, either to a suitable growth point or back to main stem. For this you do need permision from tree/land owner but it should then be a permanent solution to the problem, and a good sales persion should be able to obtain this, unless the owners are mentalists which is so often the case!!

 

Keeping everyone happy, especially the tree, shoudl be the main aim, not merely carrying ones rights to hack back to boundaries.

[Ian H]

If cutting back to the boundary line is going to leave stubs then you are carryign out improper tree work. "lopping" I think its called.

 

If the tree is in a conservation area then you still need permision for crown lift/thin/reduction etc and work to be carried out to BS etc. So cutting to an imaginary line is not ideal.

 

A good solution, if you can, is to remove branches beyond the boundary line, either to a suitable growth point or back to main stem. For this you do need permision from tree/land owner but it should then be a permanent solution to the problem, and a good sales persion should be able to obtain this, unless the owners are mentalists which is so often the case!!

 

Keeping everyone happy, especially the tree, shoudl be the main aim, not merely carrying ones rights to hack back to boundaries.

 

That sir is a very good point:congrats:

[Bundle 2]

I think that there is a law that lets you (or I think it might be the council) force access to the land to carry out tree works (and bill the tree owner for it) but I am sure it is only for cases of hazardous trees and in certain circumstances

 

Miscellaneous Provisions Act ( 1986 I think)

[Gerbutt]

yeah no worries rupe, i'll make sure all is done to the correct points. I think it may be the case that i can just take a few limbs off to the main side limb without the tree looking silly or out of balance. It realy isn't very much that has to come off.

[treequip]

I think that there is a law that lets you (or I think it might be the council) force access to the land to carry out tree works (and bill the tree owner for it) but I am sure it is only for cases of hazardous trees and in certain circumstances

 

Miscellaneous Provisions Act ( 1986 I think)

 

Misc. Prov. Allows the council to enter land and make safe where public safety is threatened. It usually needs to be an imminent danger.

 

Andy

[Big 'Ammer]

I have one on the go at the moment.

 

I have applied to crown lift and reduce some trees back to the boundary to suitable growth points etc.

 

Trees are in a belt under a blanket TPO, overhanging a garden.

 

The belt runs along the rear of a lot of other properties.

 

The owner of the trees, with whom I get on very well and work for on occasions, has refused to allow access to his land and any pruning beyond the boundary line.

 

He's happy for me to carry out any work but not to access his property or climb the trees to do it.

 

His argument is that once one garden has had it done, other people will take things into their own hands and start hacking back and felling on a Sunday or whenever like a free for all; thus defeating having the tree belt protected.

 

Apparantly a nieghbour had had a go once and got caught, and was left in no doubt about the consequences of thier actions should it happen again, both from the owner and the council.

 

So I asked the TO how are we to prune correctly and it was basically "do your best, but don't cross the boundary".

 

Fortunately, I have a pole saw and a mewp.

[common lime]

Sorry guys it is Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.

 

Not all Councils are willing to use this Act but I have severed these in the past for a Council at the request of a local councillor. Also some times on new developments planning conditions and covenants might have to be considered both any works are carried out. However enforcement of a covenat is very rare and can only be done by the rights holder. Often on new developments it is the managing agent and they are usual not interested in enforcement and the complaints end up with a Council Officer:thumbdown: