Heave subsidence

[Arborlord]

Guys just quoted where a tree is 4ft from the conservatory and 12ft from the house its a 35ft skinny oak with 2-3ft trunk.

 

Customer wants it removed.

 

Then was told they suffered from subsidence but had it underpinned or piled and the conservatory was build with deeper foundations because of the tree.

 

What are the affects of removing this tree in one go. Im no construction expert.

 

Since the house is already been damaged and repaired because the foundations were not done properly by the house builders am i at risk of being nobbled

 

Any ideas.

[Ian C]

i would be careful, get the council building inspector involved they will point you in the right direction, any cost then add on to the job for a building report. not an expert on these matters but thats what i would do, hope it helps.

[treequip]

Firstly I am surprised the tree is still there. Subsidence usually involved insurers and they want usually want any and all vegetation removed.

 

Sounds like you think the result would be different if the tree were removed in stages.

This was a common belief back in the day. I distinctly remember it being one of the first “factoids” I was fed. This was back in the days of a three knot system on three strand ropes and polly prop was still considered an upstart newcomer to the manila rope.

So lets look at the facts. If the soil has a maximum volume when saturated that will cause damage to the property it makes no difference if it reaches that volume over its quickest possible timescale or over a couple of decades.

 

I don’t think you need it but to protect yourself but I would offer a written quote with a caveat covering the subsidence issue. For those of you who haven’t come across this before, a caveat puts your client on notice of possible consequences. If they were warned and did nothing you are out of the loop. I am not a lawyer but the text needs to go something like this.

 

RE: Proposed tree removal at........

Dear punter

It has come to my attention that you property has been subject to remedial works for damage caused by subsidence.

You should be aware that tree removal can have an affect on clay based soils. You should satisfy yourself that the proposed works will not have an adverse effect on your property.

[Arborlord]

I did say that they even build the conservatory with it no more than 2 ft away.

 

Thats what i think i will do draw up an invoice with a clause excluding my company from any blame.

 

And get the customer to sign it.

 

If they dont really dont need the work so no loss.

[treequip]

That’s getting the cart before the horse.

 

You can’t actually write a clause excluding you from blame particularly after the fact. The law simply doesn’t work like that.

 

What you need to do is put them on notice before hand with a caveat, the course of action taken is then their own informed choice.

Andy

[Arborlord]

Never used a caveat before so how would that work i know you did explain a little before but just wondering if you could offer bit more detail.

[Paul Barton]

I think as a general rule heave is normally a problem when the tree was there before the house -ie the soil (which must be a shrinkable clay) around the foundations has always lost moisture due to the tree, so if you take the tree away the soil can become more saturated and therefore cause heave.

 

Conversely if the tree was planted after the house was built the soil will return to the same state as before once the tree has gone.

 

I am sure this is very much over-simplifying the matter though!

[Lee Winger]

Heave blah blah blah, how would you stop heave if the tree suddenly died from natural causes? exactly just cut it down! phased removals are considered a waste of time these day as well, as it doesn't slow soil expansion

 

I am surprised the tree wasn't cut down , when the subsidence was dealt with...

[Mesterh]

Heave blah blah blah, how would you stop heave if the tree suddenly died from natural causes? exactly just cut it down! phased removals are considered a waste of time these day as well, as it doesn't slow soil expansion

 

I am surprised the tree wasn't cut down , when the subsidence was dealt with...

 

Thats my thoughts aswell, no good messing about trying to reduce this and that, it can cause more damage in the long term.

I've done quite a few tree removals because of subsidance and the genral thought is get rid of the tree and when everything has settled down repair it.

 

Only really a problem if it was a large old tree and a new build plus also depends on the soil species etc.

[Lee Winger]

 

Only really a problem if it was a large old tree and a new build plus also depends on the soil species etc.

 

 

Technically new builds shouldn't be a problem either way, footings these days are dug taking into consideration surrounding trees..