Tennant disagreement

[olly1070]

Evening all,

 

My tenants have chopped down the tree in the picture at the house I rent to them. Can anyone identify it and give me a rough price to replace it as i will need to deduct this cost from their deposit. Thanks in advance.

[geoff]

Removal of a mature tree like that is plainly criminal damage.

 

Yep! & nothing short of it.

[Rich2484]

Removal of a mature tree like that is plainly criminal damage.

 

How would you come to that conclusion??..

 

Not sure how the law would see it as criminal. They where the tenants and in the law its there responsibility to look after the house and grounds. If the tree was three times the size and effecting foundations would it still be criminal????

[treequip]

How would you come to that conclusion??..

 

Not sure how the law would see it as criminal. They where the tenants and in the law its there responsibility to look after the house and grounds. If the tree was three times the size and effecting foundations would it still be criminal????

 

Are you sure about that?

 

What law is that then and how dose the removal of otherwise healthy vegetation come under "looking after"?

[Taupotreeman]

One of my clients is a senior judge. Next door neighbours to his holiday home hacked his Rhododendron hedge. I suggested it was criminal damage. He said it was nothing of the sort but left the neighbours in no doubt if it happened again there'd be trouble.

 

A local resident decided he wanted firewood so hopped over the fence onto the council reserve and took to a couple of Banksias. Council has now sent him a letter telling him they may take him to court for criminal damage. Seems even the law doesn't know what is and what isn't but the threat of it carries a bit of weight it seems.

 

 

Sent using Arbtalk Mobile App

[treequip]

One of my clients is a senior judge. Next door neighbours to his holiday home hacked his Rhododendron hedge. I suggested it was criminal damage. He said it was nothing of the sort but left the neighbours in no doubt if it happened again there'd be trouble.

 

A local resident decided he wanted firewood so hopped over the fence onto the council reserve and took to a couple of Banksias. Council has now sent him a letter telling him they may take him to court for criminal damage. Seems even the law doesn't know what is and what isn't but the threat of it carries a bit of weight it seems.

 

 

Sent using Arbtalk Mobile App

 

The law in the UK requires an element of intent for the criminal aspect to apply.

 

In the UK its difficult to get the police interested in vegetation related crime, they like to fob it off as a neighbour dispute if they can.

 

It often ends with the victim usually suing for financial loss and or an injunction to prevent it happening again.

 

Having away with a tree (firewood) that belongs to another is theft plain and simple.

[felixthelogchopper]

How would you come to that conclusion??..

 

Not sure how the law would see it as criminal. They where the tenants and in the law its there responsibility to look after the house and grounds. If the tree was three times the size and effecting foundations would it still be criminal????

 

I find it hard to believe that you are even asking that question. In the case of the tree removal, there is both mens rea, intent to commit the act, and actus reus, the criminal act itself, which are necessary to show to 'make' a criminal offence. In the case of the tree affecting the foundations, the damage is being caused by the tree which is the property and responsibility of the home owner. In any case, if the tenant had responsibility for the tree, such an act as you describe would be an act of omission, not a criminal act. You are trying to compare two totally different situations. If you want the full details of what constitutes the exact detail, I can recommend pp988-991, Criminal Law (Smith and Hogan, OUP 12th edition).

[Hodge]

agreed, that's where i got the £1000 replacement cost from and was shocked at the first replies price of £80! I think a lot of it is principal really, not on going around chopping peoples trees down.

 

I was giving £80 as an example of a cherry tree I bought and planted for a customer. It was £80 and around 2m high. I was not pricing to replace your tree with like for like.

 

 

Sent from Hodge's eye phone using the new fancy Arbtalk Mobile App:)

[Rupe]

agreed, that's where i got the £1000 replacement cost from and was shocked at the first replies price of £80! I think a lot of it is principal really, not on going around chopping peoples trees down.

 

 

Or £1000 then. Can you just charge them that for the "damage" without having to actually spend it on replacement? £1000 in your pocket is much better than a new tree.

 

Or is that not possible now with the new laws on tennancy/deposits?

 

 

There certainly is no law that says its "criminal damage" and there is no law that says they "have" to maintain the garden (you could rent somewhere where groundsmaintenance is paid for out of the rent) so that depends on your tennancy agreement but I think we are all agreed that cutting a tree down is wrong, even if only moraly wrong.

[likeitorlumpit]

Or- how much did their actions devalue the house

I'd say, if they were generally good tennants and paid their rent on time and left the place in good nick and didn't annoy your neighbours. Then go easy on them (less mercinary). If they were gits then I'd try for more. It's about being a reasonable landlord IMO.

[Marc Lewis]

I would have thought removing the tree and shrubs has increased value of house or at least made it a more pleasant place to live given the extra light that can now flood in through windows. I imagine that the downstairs room was quite gloomy before. This however was not a decision to be made solely by your tenants, they should have consulted you. I think it would be unreasonable to charge them for a like for like replacement though perhaps a small amount of compensation would be adequate. What are they like as tenants generally, is this the last of a long list of problems from them, or are they usually good tenants? I would have thought that this should be taken into consideration.