Neighbours tree liability

[likeitorlumpit]

This one has got both me and the housing association confused.

A neighbours conifer- about 50-60 feet had fallen across a tennants property not doing any damage other than to the tripple point fence. The tree remained at 45 degrees to the ground.

It was reduced (Xmas eve) by by the neighbours tree team just enough to prevent the sail causing damage. All arisings left in the garden. But then the trees owner was advised by his insurance company that he need do no more and it was now the housing associations responsibility.

Act of God was mentioned.

Can this right?

[skyhuck]

I think you would have the right to cut it up and throw it back onto the owners land, but he is not liable if the tree had no known fault and its the extreme wind that caused it to over hang the boundary.

[likeitorlumpit]

I think you would have the right to cut it up and throw it back onto the owners land, but he is not liable if the tree had no known fault and its the extreme wind that caused it to over hang the boundary.

 

Thats mainly what we did although the small stuff we chipped and removed from site.

I was wondering whether he would be liable if he hadn't had any tree report done which is ' likely' the case. In truth though, it most probably was just the extreme wind.

[Gary Prentice]

Unless you're a bigger type of landowner, where some sort of documented inspection regime is kept, the duty of care is fulfilled by inspecting the tree yourself. Should something raise concern, such as ffbs, then negligence only applies if further action or advice is not sought.

[ShooTa]

well act of god would therefore apply to the lovely wood that has been Gifted to the owner of the area where it fell (aka the fence owner) - and he can then "sell" the wood to the tree owner to fix the fence.

[skyhuck]

well act of god would therefore apply to the lovely wood that has been Gifted to the owner of the area where it fell (aka the fence owner) - and he can then "sell" the wood to the tree owner to fix the fence.

 

Not at all, the timber belongs to the tree owner, they are not responsible for it growing over their neighbours land or in this case being blown over there, but the neighbour much offer back the timber, or he could be prosecuted for theft.

[Gary Prentice]

Selling or conversion would actually become an offence lol

[treequip]

Not at all, the timber belongs to the tree owner, they are not responsible for it growing over their neighbours land or in this case being blown over there, but the neighbour much offer back the timber, or he could be prosecuted for theft.

 

That would be the case if the neighbour had cut the overhang, however in this case the owner (or his agents) had abandoned, even fly tipped the material,

[skyhuck]

That would be the case if the neighbour had cut the overhang, however in this case the owner (or his agents) had abandoned, even fly tipped the material,

 

As I understand it the tree is still standing.

[treequip]

As I understand it the tree is still standing.

 

Some of it is but there was no talk of felling it, the remainder of the tree that was under discussion was left on someone else's land