Boundary issue

[peatff]

I wonder if the sellers property became devalued, due to the proximity of the tree and the neighbours refusal to remove it, whether a court would make a judgement against them?

 

Yes I read it and it looks like you asked the same question here. I can only find references to the removal and replacement of the tree and a maximum value of £102,400 but not anything to say how much it's aesthetic value is reduced by any pruning and who decides the aesthetic value and translates it into a monetary value as that is what it will eventually come down to.

[Gary Prentice]

Yes I read it and it looks like you asked the same question here. I can only find references to the removal and replacement of the tree and a maximum value of £102,400 but not anything to say how much it's aesthetic value is reduced by any pruning and who decides the aesthetic value and translates it into a monetary value as that is what it will eventually come down to.

 

Peatff, apologies for the somewhat snotty response earlier, I'm grouchy when I can't sleep but your post didn't warrant my response.

 

Slightly different, but I think it answers your question. There was a court case where a horse chestnut was jointly owned and a covenant agreed. One owner sold his property and the day the new owner moved in, the co-owner hacked all the limbs off of his own side of the tree.

 

The judge considered the options, based on the original monetary value of the tree, the value after being hacked ie the poorer aesthetic form, the cost of replacement with a similar sizes tree etc. All the figures were based on the Helliwell system. I'll try to find a reference for the case later.

 

As an aside Daltontrees published an article on the helliwell system which is interesting if you missed it; 'Tree valuation revisited'

ARB Mag 162-final-eprf (1).pdf

[peatff]

It's alright, no offence taken. It's just that if I can't follow something sometimes it bugs me and I have been following this thread with an interest which I can't really explain as it will probably never affect me. I read these things instead of watching TV, much more stimulating and I have saved the link to read later thanks. I'll try not to come up with any more questions

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Mynors did write a great deal on this subject, as it's not that uncommon, but I can't remember all the details. I'll have a read up and attempt to summarize the facts for you.

 

Many thanks for the "heads-up" on Mynors, Amazon order Friday arrived Monday just in time for a quick cram read before the meeting with the neighbour this morning. I felt well briefed and the meeting went very well. I'll get on the laptop tomorrow and post some pics and detail. Just got to see the vicar now to see how he would feel about some limbs being lowered into the cemetery! It won't be a "stopper" if he's not keen but could speed the job along if he's happy.

[daltontrees]

Sounds like you are heading for a non-acrimonious outcome. Always good news!

 

Regarding valuations, it is entirely possible to carry out a Hwelliwell valuation of a tree as-is and then a valuation of the same tree if it was pruned back. This is because the measurement part of the Helliwell system can easily be adapted to the measurements of a hypothetically pruned tree.

 

A simple example would be this.

Tree before pruning has canopy profile area of 120m2, gets 6 Helliwell points. The other factors (life expectancy, importance, other trees, relation to setting and form) come to 30 points. 6 x 30 x £28/point = £5,040.

Tree after pruning has a canopy profile area of 90m2, gets 5 Helliwell points. The other factors are the same. New value 5 x 30 x £28 = £4,200.

 

But of course it's not that simple. If the pruning changes the 'form' rating of the tree by one category, its value becomes £2,100. If the pruning only reduced the area to 100m2, there is no change in value because there is no change in area category.

 

These are flaws inherent in the Helliwell system. Using it blindly like a calculator is dangerous.

[Gary Prentice]

Sounds like you are heading for a non-acrimonious outcome. Always good news!

 

Regarding valuations, it is entirely possible to carry out a Hwelliwell valuation of a tree as-is and then a valuation of the same tree if it was pruned back. This is because the measurement part of the Helliwell system can easily be adapted to the measurements of a hypothetically pruned tree.

 

A simple example would be this.

Tree before pruning has canopy profile area of 120m2, gets 6 Helliwell points. The other factors (life expectancy, importance, other trees, relation to setting and form) come to 30 points. 6 x 30 x £28/point = £5,040.

Tree after pruning has a canopy profile area of 90m2, gets 5 Helliwell points. The other factors are the same. New value 5 x 30 x £28 = £4,200.

 

But of course it's not that simple. If the pruning changes the 'form' rating of the tree by one category, its value becomes £2,100. If the pruning only reduced the area to 100m2, there is no change in value because there is no change in area category.

 

These are flaws inherent in the Helliwell system. Using it blindly like a calculator is dangerous.

 

I need to study Helliwell for my level 6, but haven't bought it yet. Do you think any of the other systems are better, or worse. Or do they suffer the same underlying issues that you raised in your article.

[daltontrees]

I need to study Helliwell for my level 6, but haven't bought it yet. Do you think any of the other systems are better, or worse. Or do they suffer the same underlying issues that you raised in your article.

 

I will send you a PM initially about this. Valuation hasn't really been raised on Arbtalk and it might deserve a separate thread. An unproven common ownership on a hedgerow is a fine example of the inadequacies of current valuation thinking, but debating a specific case in public I would suggest is not the best way to debate the generalities.

[Gary Prentice]

I will send you a PM initially about this. Valuation hasn't really been raised on Arbtalk and it might deserve a separate thread. An unproven common ownership on a hedgerow is a fine example of the inadequacies of current valuation thinking, but debating a specific case in public I would suggest is not the best way to debate the generalities.

 

Sorry for the misunderstanding, I wasn't meaning to suggest debating this specific tree but the various methods currently in common usage. As you've suggested it may be better as a new thread. I think it's probably a field that most of us know very little about.