Duty of care- dangerous trees

[chris cnc]

all good info thanks. i suppose its worth informing the owner that although they may think the removal is too costly now, it would be even more expensive if it had to go through the LA

[cerneARB]

We had some tree work done on our trees by the highways agency a few weeks ago. as far as we could tell the trees were in perfect health. The only thing they had against them was they were growing from a slight bank and had a bit of a lean toward the road but they were in no way dangerous.

 

Did a fully qualified arboriclutrist look at them or was it some highways engineer?

[chris cnc]

We had some tree work done on our trees by the highways agency a few weeks ago. as far as we could tell the trees were in perfect health. The only thing they had against them was they were growing from a slight bank and had a bit of a lean toward the road but they were in no way dangerous.

 

how often are roadside trees surveyed? or does it depend on the agency/ authority?

 

just i would have thought a surveyor would have picked up on this one, as it has been in a bad way for a number of years

[Matthew Arnold]

The trees are surveyed every 3 months to catch fungi or defects as they appear. It depends on the LA and how much of a busy bod the head of highway tree maintenance is. We had the tree officers look at the stumps and nothing was wrong with them (no spalting or obvious splits,etc). I think it was just a bit of a heavy handed response to drop the trees as the leaf litter was an issue due to the drains blocking up frequently and that one of the trees dropped a 4 inch thick branch. The branch gave in due to it being a tight union and it being moved by the double decker buses every 30 mins. They felled 6 trees.

 

 

P.S. - Lots more trees where they came from in much worse condition but well away from the highway.

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

wonder if i can pick your brains...?

 

over a month ago i was asked to look at a tree belonging to a family member of one of my friends.

 

the tree is large, dead, decayed and overall, dangerous.

 

the owners home and a busy road stand well within target range.

 

i provided a written summary of the trees condition, and advised that the tree should be removed as soon as possible to avoid injury etc etc, also explaining that they would be liable for any damages.

 

the owner is reluctant to spend the money on the removal, and the tree remains standing.

 

what is the next step for the conscientious arborist? its certainly not a tree you would want to remove for free, and it certainly should not be left standing. but if the owner refuses to pay for a removal, can anything be done?

 

the tree poses a risk to the general public, as well as the property owners- is this different from a situation where the tree poses a threat only to the owner?

 

should i notify the LA?

 

what would you do in this situation?

 

would be good to hear your thoughts

 

chris

 

Chris, apologies for short cutting this thread and for repeating what you probably now know...'good old AA Teccie, bless him!'

 

IF the tree poses a threat to the public highway the the HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, possibly same as the Local Authority, should be notified. They can the serve notice under Sect. 154 and enter the land to remove the tree should the landowner not comply (in theory they can then also attempt to recover the cost from the landowner.)

 

Alternatively if it doesn't affect the Highway but could affect 3rd party land AND if it is posing an immenent threat then Local Gov. Misc. Prov. Act Sect 23 can be used simialrly.

 

At the end of the day what more can you do..? I reckon you've done your best n 'gudonya' for that....yer conscience can be clear.

 

Cheesr..

paul

[chris cnc]

cheers AA teccie for the info, i think i'll give the owner another chance to sort it out then notify the appropriate authority, better to be safe than sorry eh

.

[ad15]

bad situation, what would happen if the tree owner did not want the dead wood removed? (despite the neighbour paying for it). can such necessary works be "forced"?

 

the owner had "some" work carried out last year,,, the outfit that did it got half way up and bottled the rest (the tree moves about a bit in the wind) the owner has not been to see the work,,, he has told the neighbour through the letting agent that if they want work done they are more than welcome to pay for it,,

 

the owner is a lazy good-for-nothing... just trying to get out of it,,

 

we're not going behind backs to do the job,, we have permission to do it,, and the planning applications etc to go with it..

[chris cnc]

 

we're not going behind backs to do the job,, we have permission to do it,, and the planning applications etc to go with it..

 

i wasnt suggesting otherwise, just wondering what would happen in that situation thats all