Giving back offcuts to owners?

[Shane]

If a neighbour cuts off some overhanging branches from one of your trees, they MUST (afaik) offer them back to you.

 

What if you don't want them? can they just chuck them over anyway or is it a case of 'if they want to cut them off - they then have to dispose of them'?

 

What would be the legal implications of dumping the offcuts if the owner made it clear they do not want them?

 

I can see that some people might want their apples back but we've

never had anyone insist on having their leylandii offcuts back.

 

I ask this as we occasionally get this with neighbourly disputes where the aggrieved neighbour is paying us to cut it but don't want to have to pay to have it removed. I always quote for removal or (if they insist on giving it back) let them chuck it over after we have finished.

 

I hope I've worded that to make some sense.

[detritus21]

You must offer the branches back. You cannot just throw them back as you are not looking after your neighbour (neighbour not being just your direct neighbour but anyone else it may affect). Taking the branches without offering would be classed as theft. Not sure how many people would take it that far though.

 

Likewise if you wish to retrieve something you have dropped into a garden you can do so without reprisals provided you do it in the quickest and most efficient way as not to cause a nuisance.

[felixthelogchopper]

If you return them when they have said they don't want them, I suspect you would be fly-tipping.

[skyhuck]

Legally it is possible that you could be accused of steeling if you don't offer them back, however the penalty for the theft would be the value of the off cuts, so I never bother with clippings or small branches.

 

Larger branches have some value as fire wood, so I tend to offer those to the tree owner.

 

Also if I feel the owner of the tree is not happy that its being cut I tend to ask if they want them, as they may try to use your not offering to cause trouble for you.

 

Personally I would never throw unwanted arising onto someones land, its just not professional, IMO.

[Andy Clark]

The important thing to remember about Tort and Common Law, is that it is benchmarked and judged against the dutiful actions of a reasonable person

 

There are no real set rules of what one must or must not do, but if someone doesn't act reasonably and causes a tort to another, then the other party can seek recompense from that person that their unreasonable actions caused a loss.

 

So the established standpoint is that they are "obliged to offer" the arrisings back to the owner. And the owner can of course say "no thanks". This negates the historic principles of theft, that came about from when wood/fruit had a substantial value.

 

As for dumping the arisings over the fence, regardless of the neighbour saying "no thanks", it would depend the consequences of throwing it back over.

 

For example if it was thrown over and smashed the neighbours green house, then they would have grounds for a claim. If it was council land, then the council could pursue for fly tipping, or if ended up on the footpath could pursue for obstruction under the highways act. If it was simply thrown onto an open expansion of the neighbours lawn and caused no loss or damage, then apart from causing a feud, there's no real grounds for a claim.

 

If all else fails, try and avoid being dragged into any dispute between neighbours, and just stick to what you believe is reasonable.

 

 

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Arbtalk mobile app

[treequip]

As others have said above but there is no reason why the client should bear the cost of disposing of the arising's

 

For the most part a few branches aren't a problem but disposing of a garden length of conifer brash is a significant cost.

 

Chucking it from whence it came is indeed fly tipping but the penalty is negligible if you do no damage.

 

It is possible for the client to recover the costs of disposal from the tree owner.

[mendiplogs]

If a neighbour cuts off some overhanging branches from one of your trees, they MUST (afaik) offer them back to you.

 

What if you don't want them? can they just chuck them over anyway or is it a case of 'if they want to cut them off - they then have to dispose of them'?

 

What would be the legal implications of dumping the offcuts if the owner made it clear they do not want them?

 

I can see that some people might want their apples back but we've

never had anyone insist on having their leylandii offcuts back.

 

I ask this as we occasionally get this with neighbourly disputes where the aggrieved neighbour is paying us to cut it but don't want to have to pay to have it removed. I always quote for removal or (if they insist on giving it back) let them chuck it over after we have finished.

 

I hope I've worded that to make some sense.

 

Hi mate then I would tell owner of the tree that the tree that's coming into my garden it why should he have cut back trees then dump or remove it not his trees I no what I do put them over wall)fence it the owner of trees why let your trees over grow onto other peoples land it not right thanks Jon

[Shane]

I always try to discuss the cutting with the tree owner first, and at that point raise the issues. I have never thrown the branches back unless they want them - always price the job assuming professional disposal (chip/log/tip etc).

 

The questions remains...

 

If the tree owner can refuse to accept the arisings, does he have to pay for their disposal? and if so - What say could he reasonably have in how/cost of disposal?

[treequip]

I always try to discuss the cutting with the tree owner first, and at that point raise the issues. I have never thrown the branches back unless they want them - always price the job assuming professional disposal (chip/log/tip etc).

 

The questions remains...

 

If the tree owner can refuse to accept the arisings, does he have to pay for their disposal? and if so - What say could he reasonably have in how/cost of disposal?

 

The law holds that the branches belong to them and if they chose not to accept them its only reasonable that they meet their obligations financially.

 

If they don't want to pay there is always small claims.

 

As far as what to charge, work out how much time was drag chip and tip and divide the bill accordingly.

[openspaceman]

If the tree owner can refuse to accept the arisings, does he have to pay for their disposal? and if so - What say could he reasonably have in how/cost of disposal?

 

If we agree that the branches were trespassing but the nuisance was not actionable (e.g. no damage was being caused) and the aggrieved party has the right to mitigate the nuisance by cutting them off and they remain the property of the tree owner then I would say the tree owner could be approached for the disposal cost if they do not accept them back. However they are now waste and must be dispose properly.

 

This perennial problem will only be settled if some warring neighbours take it as far as the high court and get a precedent set.

 

In the meanwhile talk to neighbour first, tell them what work will be done, ask if they want any of the arisings and if not dispose of them as normal.