Can i fell this tree legally??

[Jesse]

hi there my first post so not sure if this will make sense. I'm self employed as property/grounds maintenance and been asked by nursing home to cut down a 30ft ash. I have no cs certs but have used chainsaws for 20 years. am i right in thinking its illegal for me to fell the tree without certs. My insurance excludes tree work but i can demolish a 3 storey building. ??????

If i wasnt getting paid for the work but just cutting for firewood is that acceptable..? any opinions please.... should i take it down and take the dollar or pass the job on?

thanks in advance. Jim

 

Hi Jim, first of all i thought this was a ptake. The answer is no, you are not insured under your own insurance or that of the nursing home, pass the work on to a company who are insured and just ask them to leave the wood for you . HSE could prosecute you if they were informed of your activities . And i am sure the owners of the care home may also have something to say !!

[agrimog]

quote"This is the relevant legislation:

 

Regulation 4(2) of the Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992 states: "Every self-employed person shall ensure that he is provided with suitable personal protective equipment where he may be exposed to a risk to his health or safety while at work except where and to the extent that such risk has been adequately controlled by other means which are equally or more effective."

 

and

 

Regulation 9(1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 states: "Every employer shall ensure that all persons who use work equipment have received adequate training for purposes of health and safety, including training in the methods which may be adopted when using the work equipment, any risks which such use may entail and precautions to be taken." where in this legislation does it state must have done nptc, lantra, or city & guilds chainsaw course, I can only see that magic word ADEQUATE, still seems to me a lot of people are getting rich out of twisting the written word for there own financial gain, and fior your information, it is still possible to get public liability and damage insurance for tree work without any tickets

[BusterBrownExeter]

Under the Health and safety at work act your client is ultimately responsible for personnel (employed or self employed) on their property (private or commercial) this includes ensuring that certification for use of equipment and PPE/LOLER/Working at Heights REGS and so on are adhered to. Everything is fine until something goes wrong and at this point you and the client are in trouble. Not to mention if there turns out to be a TPO on this tree ......

[treequip]

quote"This is the relevant legislation:

 

Regulation 4(2) of the Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992 states: "Every self-employed person shall ensure that he is provided with suitable personal protective equipment where he may be exposed to a risk to his health or safety while at work except where and to the extent that such risk has been adequately controlled by other means which are equally or more effective."

 

and

 

Regulation 9(1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 states: "Every employer shall ensure that all persons who use work equipment have received adequate training for purposes of health and safety, including training in the methods which may be adopted when using the work equipment, any risks which such use may entail and precautions to be taken." where in this legislation does it state must have done nptc, lantra, or city & guilds chainsaw course, I can only see that magic word ADEQUATE, still seems to me a lot of people are getting rich out of twisting the written word for there own financial gain, and fior your information, it is still possible to get public liability and damage insurance for tree work without any tickets

 

How are you going to prove (to the courts when it all goes wrong) that your training and assessment are adequate?

 

You can’t just say, "Bill checked me out a couple of years back and said I was a good un" can you?

 

How will you demonstrate to someone that is looking to employ someone or engage a contractor that he has at least half a chance you won’t muck it up at the first opportunity.

[Hodge]

This is why our industry is in the state it's in.

[Ian C]

This is why our industry is in the state it's in.

 

Well said hodge.

 

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

[HCR]

where in this legislation does it state must have done nptc, lantra, or city & guilds chainsaw course, I can only see that magic word ADEQUATE, still seems to me a lot of people are getting rich out of twisting the written word for there own financial gain, and fior your information, it is still possible to get public liability and damage insurance for tree work without any tickets

 

Easy answer - it doesn't doesn't say that you must have done any particular course.

 

However, NPTC is recognised by the courts as being adequate, so your life is going to be a whole lot easier if you have it (or an equivalent) if something goes wrong and you end up before the beak having to prove that you had indeed received adequate training. Though I'll be the first to admit if you've done something stupid, the fact that you've had training is hardly an excuse!

 

People can make their own choices as to whether or not to get formal training and certification, but ploughing your own furrow may turn out to be a risky strategy.

[Rich2484]

I thought nptc and lantra are the same thing now??

 

Sorry derail.

[chaffey]

Got to go with Hodge on this one. I was under the impression that if you are not using saws on your own property the land (home) owner should ensure that you are suitably qualified. If things go wrong then responsibility will lie partly with them. So as has been mooted before you have no chainsaw certs at all although you have been doing it for 20 years, so a bit difficult to prove you are competent. Then we move onto the insurance. You are proposing to do work on what is essentially a commercial property and you have been advised to 'wing' it with your home insurance! Just take a little time to think how this might look if things did go wrong. in my humble opinion I would say if you are going to undertake jobs like this why not just do the ticket(s) and also take out the right insurance because if things were to go wrong at least you would have a clear concience, as you have done all you could. Now I will go back to reading and not commenting for months at a time!!

[agg221]

I was under the impression that if you are not using saws on your own property the land (home) owner should ensure that you are suitably qualified....you have been advised to 'wing' it with your home insurance!

 

As the person who mentioned home insurance, just to clarify, I did not advise winging it. I mentioned it because under some circumstances it is a viable (and appropriate) route to go, and yes you are allowed to use a chainsaw on other people's land with no "suitable qualification" whatsoever, so long as it's not for hire or reward - nothing to stop someone going to B&Q and buying a saw to go and help their mate chop down their 60ft leylandii hedge. It may not be very clever, but it is insured (if they have their own contents insurance).

 

It's up to the original poster to determine whether it fits his particular circumstances. Hypothetically, if he is a gardener who has been offered a tree and could use a bit of firewood then, subject to confirmation from the nursing home (which I personally would get in writing) that this is not a paid part of his work and falls outside his contract, it would be perfectly legitimate to do this on his own time. If however he is actually being paid for the job of removing the tree and happens to be keeping the timber then it would not.

 

It's up to him to decide, based on the circumstances.

 

Why not just do the tickets? Consider how much CS30+31 costs, vs. cutting down one tree. Rather expensive firewood

 

Alec