Legal definition of a "Reduction"??

[Stephen Blair]

Maybe the the fact the quotes to include stump grinding may give it away huck:001_rolleyes:

[skyhuck]

While they haven't referred to 3998, it's definition of crown reduction (and therefore the definition that would be likely to be hurled around by the shiny shoes legal bods) is;

 

"[An] operation that results in an overall reduction in the height and/or spread of the crown of a tree by means of a general shortening of twigs and/or branches, whilst retaining the main framework of the crown."

 

So shorten away Huck, but retain the main framework of the crown. Whatever you decide that is!

 

The thing is his notification states "reduce, thin and lift", no mention of "crown":001_huh:

 

I really think they are either really not bothered if the trees are butchered or they have not done their job.

 

I think he should have been asked for a better defined description of the works.

[skyhuck]

Maybe the the fact the quotes to include stump grinding may give it away huck:001_rolleyes:

 

[Amelanchier]

I think you're right insofar as they either don't care or have made a mistake.

 

If I were going to be awkward (unlikely I know ) I'd say that you can't lift or thin a tree that has been reduced to a stump so there seems to be a presumption that some sort of branch structure is to be left...

[Paul Jenks]

I'd also be clear with the specification the client wants so that he/she is happy with the works, BS3998 notwithstanding, so he/she pays the bill.

It'd be nice to work to clear BS guidelines as there is more clarity, though, as Tony S has said, as long as there is a framework left, crack on. Sometimes a heavier reduction is expedient. (To get the invoice paid). If, however, on your quotation and, for that matter, anywhere else on your marketing material, you state that you work to BS 3998, it may be seen as beyond the scope of the BS. You'd have to have a pretty zealous TO to pick you up on it though.

[Dean Lofthouse]

Before and after shots please Huck

[likeitorlumpit]

I'd also be clear with the specification the client wants so that he/she is happy with the works, BS3998 notwithstanding, so he/she pays the bill.

It'd be nice to work to clear BS guidelines as there is more clarity, though, as Tony S has said, as long as there is a framework left, crack on. Sometimes a heavier reduction is expedient. (To get the invoice paid). If, however, on your quotation and, for that matter, anywhere else on your marketing material, you state that you work to BS 3998, it may be seen as beyond the scope of the BS. You'd have to have a pretty zealous TO to pick you up on it though.[/QUOTE]

there're out there