neighbours tree

[skyhuck]

Listen to Rupe, he's really got this one covered

[Mark Bolam]

Think we have gone off topic a bit late lol. I know nothing about the process but I am guessing you work top down?

If so, how is the lowest branch taken with nothing to lean a ladder on? There must be some long robust loppers available?

 

Anyway, thank you all for your input, I'll email from prison about the outcome

 

Haha, a man with a sense of humour, you're alright mate.

Seriously, Rupe has said it all.

 

I still wouldn't do it at this time of year though.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

[Ian C]

Haha, a man with a sense of humour, you're alright mate.

Seriously, Rupe has said it all.

 

I still wouldn't do it at this time of year though.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

 

Bet stevie would!

 

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Arbtalk mobile app

[Stephen Blair]

Prune it now and get it on the Fungui Forum next year

[tarzan]

I sorry but unless I'm very much mistaken both the above are completely wrong, your neighbour does not have the right to steal your air space with their tree. The over hanging branches can be removed, to boundary, they should offered to the tree owner, if the tree dies or is unstable (which I personally think is nonsense) tough, the tree should not have been planted so close to the boundary.

 

 

Skyhuck is right the law states that if the said tree is infringing on ones boundary and the owner of said tree dose not control the growth then the other person can have the tree pruned back to boundary mark and the tree owner is not responsible for the waste and by law cannot be left on his property.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk mobile app

Edited April 9, 2014 by tarzan

[Ian C]

Told ya.

 

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Arbtalk mobile app

[treequip]

Skyhuck is right the law states that if the said tree is infringing on ones boundary and the owner of said tree dose not control the growth then the other person can have the tree pruned back to boundary mark and the tree owner is not responsible for the waste and by law cannot be left on his property.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk mobile app

 

Show me where it says that in law...........

[tarzan]

Show me where it says that in law...........

 

 

Look it up it is the law.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk mobile app

[daltontrees]

Someone please look it up and then put it on the forum here that you're all partly right and partly wrong. It's undsettling that several professionals froem the industry are willing to state such differing and contradictory versions of the law on a public forum. Bad for the reputation of the 'profession' if nothing else.

 

This subject comes up regularly and never gets resolved.

 

And I'd use ascaffolding tower if I had to. Only the OP and the arborist have seen the site. If I couldn't get at least 2 anchor positions of at least 50mm diameter that were entirely in the client's airspace, including one suitable for descent on a rope and cambium saver, I'd use a tower. You can hire them by the hour for buttons. No pole pruner in the world is going to let you do good quality cuts from the ground. The neighbour has said no trespass, that means no trespass. Why recommend a rope-and-harness solution that can't be implemented?

[skyhuck]

Someone please look it up and then put it on the forum here that you're all partly right and partly wrong. It's undsettling that several professionals froem the industry are willing to state such differing and contradictory versions of the law on a public forum. Bad for the reputation of the 'profession' if nothing else.

 

This subject comes up regularly and never gets resolved.

 

And I'd use ascaffolding tower if I had to. Only the OP and the arborist have seen the site. If I couldn't get at least 2 anchor positions of at least 50mm diameter that were entirely in the client's airspace, including one suitable for descent on a rope and cambium saver, I'd use a tower. You can hire them by the hour for buttons. No pole pruner in the world is going to let you do good quality cuts from the ground. The neighbour has said no trespass, that means no trespass. Why recommend a rope-and-harness solution that can't be implemented?

 

It always gets resolved, it's clear you are entitled to remove to boundary and over hanging 'trespassing' branches. (So long as there is no TPO or CA)

 

If pedants wish to argue about wether its 'Law' or some other means that makes this the case, good luck to them, but it don't interest me