Duty of care

[RobArb]

Who would the duty of care fall under in this situation?

 

Sorry no before pics, just thought it would be a normal job!

 

 

Went to thin these two A. pseudoplatanoides this morning (the one behind being a 4 stemmed tree) and i was up the single one at the front. One of the tree inspectors happened to be on site to give the go ahead on the work (thin) for the tree i was doing as on the sheet the 5 stems were only down as one tree (they were quite clearly 2), anyway, as i was climbing to start work i noticed this hazard beam crack (possible banana type crack), and told the inspector (who wanted to retain the tree) that i could do with a reduction rather than thin, to alleviate some weight off the cracked limb.

 

He argued that it was a crack in the bark (even told the client) and that nothing was wrong with it, it definately wasn't just a crack in the bark as you could see cracked wood, it did not go through to the other side of the stem though.

 

Where does the duty of care lie if this tree/limb were to fail?

[skyhuck]

Looks like a bark crack to me.

[testcricket01]

Looks like a bark crack to me.

 

 

[RobArb]

Honestly huck, the crack was deeper:biggrin:

[Andy Collins]

Looks like marker pen to me:thumbup: Always carry something to push into the crack, then photograph it:blushing: as evidence of the depth (I give up)

[Mesterh]

I think the duty of care always lies with the owner.

 

I have heard so many tree owners complain about TO decisions and say they will place the blame on the TO if the tree falls,splits,etc etc and kills someone damages property etc.

 

I don't know if it's ever been tried in a court of law though.

[scotspine1]

He argued that it was a crack in the bark (even told the client)

 

did he go up ladders to take a close look?

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

HI Rob, greta to meet you on Tuesday, thanks for your intro!

 

The 'DoC' is principally the tree owners, whoever that might be. However if the tree were to fail, and cause injury.harm.loss etc., then the owner would be potentially entitled to sue the 'last professional' at the site for breach of professional duty (assuming the defect to be the cause of the failure and the fact that failure was 'forseeable' AND bearing in mind the level of evidence required in a civil case would be 'on the balance of probabilities', i.e.51%, rather than as with criminal law of 'beyond reasonable doubt' i.e. 90+%'.

 

Obvioulsy this reply is 'my' interpretation of the prevailing law her and not a legal definitive (sorry, don;t usually caveat commnets but seemed appropriate to do so here.)

 

Hope this helps...at least a little.

 

Paul

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

Its a bark crack rob, incremental growth due to the compression stress and adaptive (under limb) increment, it is a long crack but IMO its just growth and a sign of vigour

[PhilBeech]

Its a bark crack rob, incremental growth due to the compression stress and adaptive (under limb) increment, it is a long crack but IMO its just growth and a sign of vigour

 

Agreed, nothing to worry me unduly there, be careful not to 'mark your card' arguing the toss around clients.