Getting to Grips with subsidence

[Nick Harrison]

Hi Nick,

 

The AA course is good but quite technical if you don't already have a decent understanding. There will 20+ people in there as well so not that interactive. May not be a good choice for your first attempt.

 

The CAS course isn't a subsidence course, its a mortgage report writing course. I've done that also. There is a difference. Subs course will be about trying to determine the cause of existing damage. A mortgage course is about trying to predict whether it will happen. Subs investigation is based on assessing accurate data such as soils analysis and trial holes. Mortgage is based on assumed values like geological surveys maps to determine soil type, and NHBC guidance to determine foundation depth based on the age of the building. You will never be asked to do level monitoring for a mortgage report and I doubt you could win a subs case by using geo survey maps. Does that make sense?

 

I have done subs investigations as an LA TO in the past and I now do mortgage reports and although some of the info overlaps they are not the same thing. If you want to do subs investigation do a subs course. Tree life do a one day subs workshop. I haven't done this but I did my tech cert and level 6 diploma with them and you cover subs in those and that was excellent. I also did tree life's mortgage course and I would highly recommend that also if you were looking at doing mortgage reports. An excellent workshop. You can't skimp on courses with things this technical. As you can see I have already done two mortgage courses and with info gained from both I am very confident in undertaking these reports but I will still do the Myerscough one at some point.

 

What arb qualifications have you already done and where are you based?

 

Hi Chris

 

get what you're saying about the technical data side of things. As it stands, if the necessary investigations have not been carried out (soil and root analysis, adequate monitoring etc) I will not make a final recommendation. once the above has been completed, our loss adjusters provide their feedback and then it's my turn to input.

I think what i'm struggling to get a grip on is how best to move forward in a situation where viable options are limited, i.e. there's a big potential claim waiting in the wings, the tree is, in my opinion, worthy of retention, so underpinning is the usual compromise, perhaps with some reduction works. from my limited time dealing with this scenario, the reduction work seems to be an add on from the insurers as some sort of belt and braces approach. I've recently had some correspondence from an underpinning company who have stated that their work is not guaranteed unless all trees within the vicinity are reduced to the height of the building affected, is this normal practise? I personally feel very reluctant to start pruning mature trees simply to tick a box in order to reach settlement.

I have been working through various papers from the arb journal trying to find some clarity on how best to tackle this complex situation.

The obvious paradox is that ultimately, trees in the urban environment are essentially trying to exist in an entirely unnatural environment, so I guess the odds are stacked against them. From what I can tell there's plenty of research on how best to deal with trees in the planning process but for those that are currently in situ providing such essential benefits, i'm struggling to find much helpful research in this area (could be i'm not looking in the right place)

Part of the reason of looking at this course is that I'm hoping to increase my knowledge of subterranean root activity in these hostile urban environments and how best to deal with the increasing tide of damage claims.

 

My experience up till now chris has been mainly climbing, I've done the usual route of level 2, tech cert, PTI, running my own business for 5 years and a very informative 2 years at Hampstead with Mr Humphries. So basically, very little in the field experience of subsidence!

 

thanks for the input on this one

 

nick

[Chris at eden]

Subs is tricky no doubt. It depends how important the tree is to the owner and whether they want to spend all that money on underpinning. Underpinning is a pain as well, the residents may need to move out while its being done and then you are left with the issue of how the fact the house has been underpinned will affect its value. Let me ask you this. If you went to view a house you were thinking of buying and it had been underpinned and the tree was still in place, would you pay market value? I wouldn't, in fact I wouldn't buy it full stop. Underpinning doesn't always work and you can still get secondary settlement when it does in other areas. I would say choose your battles well and don't try to save everything, you will bankrupt the country if you do. That may not be a popular view but its a fact.

 

As you have already done tech cert you should have the underpinning knowledge (no pun intended) for the AA courses go for it. Its a good day and you get Biddle's book thrown in which is a bonus.

 

One final point. Mate of mine who is a TO asked a while ago about a subs claim. He had soils and mpi data that said shrinkable clay, root identification from the tree near the damage, and level monitoring that said seasonal. He was going to knock it back as there was no desiccation testing. That's not reasonable in my opinion. Remember its balance of probabilities not proof that is required.

 

Always check the data closely. You'd be surprised how often the conclusions are not supported by the findings, or trees are further away than the report states.

 

Hope this helps,

[Nick Harrison]

Subs is tricky no doubt. It depends how important the tree is to the owner and whether they want to spend all that money on underpinning. Underpinning is a pain as well, the residents may need to move out while its being done and then you are left with the issue of how the fact the house has been underpinned will affect its value. Let me ask you this. If you went to view a house you were thinking of buying and it had been underpinned and the tree was still in place, would you pay market value? I wouldn't, in fact I wouldn't buy it full stop. Underpinning doesn't always work and you can still get secondary settlement when it does in other areas. I would say choose your battles well and don't try to save everything, you will bankrupt the country if you do. That may not be a popular view but its a fact.

 

As you have already done tech cert you should have the underpinning knowledge (no pun intended) for the AA courses go for it. Its a good day and you get Biddle's book thrown in which is a bonus.

 

One final point. Mate of mine who is a TO asked a while ago about a subs claim. He had soils and mpi data that said shrinkable clay, root identification from the tree near the damage, and level monitoring that said seasonal. He was going to knock it back as there was no desiccation testing. That's not reasonable in my opinion. Remember its balance of probabilities not proof that is required.

 

Always check the data closely. You'd be surprised how often the conclusions are not supported by the findings, or trees are further away than the report states.

 

Hope this helps,

 

that 's an interesting point about being put off buying a property that's been underpinned previously. I'm sure you've read all the research that talks about mature trees adding value to a property, does the tipping point into a negative feature happen once subsidence has occurred or is even the likelihood enough to affect the property price negatively?

I guess the mortgage lenders and insurers are the bodies most likely to control that one.

 

And what about the amenity value to the immediate neighbourhood, what detrimental financial effect would the removal of a high amenity tree due to subs have on those neighbouring properties? enough to factor into a potential fight to retain a tree??

 

I read the 'Tree-related subsidence: Pruning is not the answer' paper from 2005 which doesn't give much hope to trees that find themselves in a subs dispute, heard there has been an update which I've not been able to find?

 

all interesting stuff I think, so look forward to doing the course later this year.

[David Humphries]

Had you seen Jake's presentation to the LTOA seminar on Subsidence from Nov 2012?

 

"subsidence - a tree officer perspective and what we need to do for the future"

 

Also a good over view of Berent v Family Mosaic & LB Islington by Kal Sandhu senior litigation exec

 

 

You need to log on with your password to access the presentation from the resource section

 

 

.

[Andrew Gale]

Take a look at Tree Life's subsidence course; did it a few ago and was very good

[Nick Harrison]

Will look up jakes presentation. Have seen some stuff about the Berent case, don't think the whole thing though. Will have a trawl around the ltoa website

Cheers

[benedmonds]

S Its a good day and you get Biddle's book thrown in which is a bonus.

 

Volume 2 of biddles Tree root damage to buildings rates as the most unreadable book I have ever had the misfortune to try and read...

[Chris at eden]

Volume 2 of biddles Tree root damage to buildings rates as the most unreadable book I have ever had the misfortune to try and read...

 

[Chris at eden]

that 's an interesting point about being put off buying a property that's been underpinned previously. I'm sure you've read all the research that talks about mature trees adding value to a property, does the tipping point into a negative feature happen once subsidence has occurred or is even the likelihood enough to affect the property price negatively?

I guess the mortgage lenders and insurers are the bodies most likely to control that one.

 

And what about the amenity value to the immediate neighbourhood, what detrimental financial effect would the removal of a high amenity tree due to subs have on those neighbouring properties? enough to factor into a potential fight to retain a tree??

 

I read the 'Tree-related subsidence: Pruning is not the answer' paper from 2005 which doesn't give much hope to trees that find themselves in a subs dispute, heard there has been an update which I've not been able to find?

 

all interesting stuff I think, so look forward to doing the course later this year.

 

 

I find the whole tree value thing can be a little misrepresented sometimes. No doubt large properties in the leafy suburbs get a boost in value but can you really say the same about a scrappy old sycamore in a council garden which is way too small for it? Can't have a BBQ cos of shade, honeydew and greenfly. Does that still add value? I don't see it.

 

The big value for me is the environmental gains, storm water interception, particulate uptake, etc. The effects of PM10 pollution costs the nhs billions per year, more than obesity. Now that would be some joined-up thinking, spend some of the money saved by the nhs on underpinning.

[Gary Prentice]

The big value for me is the environmental gains, storm water interception, particulate uptake, etc. The effects of PM10 pollution costs the nhs billions per year, more than obesity. Now that would be some joined-up thinking, spend some of the money saved by the nhs on underpinning.

 

Chris, you're the eternal optimist, but I like your way of thinking.