Neglect or misfortune?

[fagus]

Should be sufficient of have an inspection regime in place as long has they have records of when this is being undertaken.

 

Not conceivable, and I feel a judge would agree, to fully inspect trees, e.g buttresses, to not only Council trees but private trees within falling distance of the highway. A Council policy to regularly remind tree owners to inspect their own trees is also necessary.

 

Drive by or windscreen surveys are inevitable if you have many hundred of miles of highway to inspect.

 

Regime to spot dead trres, overhanging limbs might be A roads every three months, B roads every year, C roads every 2 years, unclassified 5 years. Still a tall order to do but a priority as an accident through neglect can cost thousands even millions for a lifetime care claim, house redesign and refurbishment. TO's can be miss this as they get involved with minuteae and the inbox.

[Daniël Bos]

Don't know enough about anything really, but would a sounding hammer not have picked up the decay easily. I'm fairly certain a few taps on the oak in that vid would have made it's condition a bit clearer.

[10 Bears]

He has the right to find out if they have been negligent, but just because a tree falls on his car does not mean the council have been negligent. Did SSC have an appropriate tree safety policy? Was the surveyor suitably qualified and experienced? Did the surveyor follow procedure? Did the surveyor make the right judgement based on the evidence in front of him or her, at the time of the survey? Were any works actioned in accordance with their policy?

 

Hmm - dodgy editing. If you put back in the rest of what I had written for context you should see that pretty much the points you try to raise have already been addressed - particularly when it comes to the legal entitlement of the aggrieved.