Trees and Trespass...

[fergusonforestry]

i'm assuming you are in England/wales? I believe as far as I know trespass is a civil offence and can only be prosecuted if you are causing damage? so not sure where that leaves the situation? up here in Scotland there are no trespass laws

[Chris at eden]

Permission is required by law otherwise its trespassing, but its a little different with trees and owners of, as you can not refuse access if the only way of abating the nuisance is via access over your land, they still need to ask, and you can stipulate conditions such as timings, and what machinery they bring onto your land. Look up, i think its called "Access to neighbouring land act" i would need to look it up again but anyone who has recently done Tech cert will know. The act of theft of branch and cordwood, or fruit is defined as Conversion and to gain access to someones land without permission is Trespass.

 

 

Whether it is considered as conversion or theft is dependent on what you do with it. It you sell or make a monetary gain from your neighbour's apples which happen to fall into your garden that would be theft. If you make an apple pie and eat it that would be conversion. That is how Dave Dowson explained it when I was doing my L6.

 

The owner of a tree can arrange access to collect his apples at a mutually acceptable time. Bit bonkers really as if the neighbour says no you would have to go through the courts by which time the apples would be looing pretty naf.

[Phaeolus&Ustulina]

Bonjour!

 

Yep to confirm in England and Wales.

 

Thank you very much for some interesting answers and further questions.

 

It is the 'Trespass' or 'debate of Transgressio' that is proving to be complex.

 

Mynors "And if fruit falls onto adjoining land, its owner is entitled to enter that land and recover it"

 

It is my incorrect / correct interpretation that fruit could also be substituted for trimmings etc etc

 

Unfortunately, in this particular case, Mynors does not mention Trespass - is there some "goes without saying" and or clever "by implication" statement here ?

 

KR

 

PhaUst

Edited August 19, 2015 by Phaeolus&Ustulina
punc.

[Lazurus]

For theft

 

"To dishonestly appropriate property belonging to another, with the intention to permanently deprive"

 

If the apples / branches fell in your garden you would not be obtaining them dishonestly, therefor no theft, as for monetary gain, no mention of that in the theft act.

 

Trespass is indeed a civil dispute in England and as such would require a civil (costly) prosecution, however there is always criminal damage if anything was damaged

 

If without lawful excuse, destroyed or damaged property belonging to another, intending to destroy or damage such property or being reckless as to whether such property would be destroyed or damaged

 

Cor wot a minefield.........

[Chris at eden]

For theft

 

"To dishonestly appropriate property belonging to another, with the intention to permanently deprive"

 

If the apples / branches fell in your garden you would not be obtaining them dishonestly, therefor no theft, as for monetary gain, no mention of that in the theft act.

 

Trespass is indeed a civil dispute in England and as such would require a civil (costly) prosecution, however there is always criminal damage if anything was damaged

 

If without lawful excuse, destroyed or damaged property belonging to another, intending to destroy or damage such property or being reckless as to whether such property would be destroyed or damaged

 

Cor wot a minefield.........

 

The thing about monetary gain comes I assume from the court precedent, not the dictionary. Didn't ask. If Dave Dowson says that is how it is, that's good enough for me.

[Gary Prentice]

The thing about monetary gain comes I assume from the court precedent, not the dictionary. Didn't ask. If Dave Dowson says that is how it is, that's good enough for me.

 

That may prove an interesting answer to a barrister, " Dave Dowson said so",

 

But I concur with both your answer and that what Dave Dowson says is good enough.

[Jesse]

Bonjour!

 

"The owner of a tree is free to come upon your land to prune or to recover prunings without committing trespass, even if you refuse him permission to do so."

 

Talk to me.

 

Kind Regards

 

PhaUst

 

I'll try again with this one, even to put it another way, in arb simple terms,

If you enter someone's garden without asking to retrieve what ever arisings you have dropped over you run the risk of

1 Legal action if you damage something or if what was dropped into the garden damaged something, and this could even just be the lawn,

2 Civil action , this could just develop from an anul retentive land owner , for almost any reason that they could find, as to why you have entered their garden without permission and be very expensive to for you to defend.

3 Most common, a straight punch to the head, then questions asked, as they may believe you to be a burglar, police would do very little.

Best to ask first and if no one is in leave a note with your details and call again in the evening. why run the risk of upsetting anyone and tarnishing your reputation, better still don't drop anything next door, or even better introduce yourself to them at the start of the job, you may even pick up more work once they have met you.

[daltontrees]

To hell with this, it's just easier to make the motion with your fingers!

 

I think it's called inverted commas. Unless you mean some other two-fingered motion you might make to a neighbour?

[daltontrees]

That may prove an interesting answer to a barrister, " Dave Dowson said so",

 

But I concur with both your answer and that what Dave Dowson says is good enough.

 

Who the heck is Dave Dowson?

[Gary Prentice]

Who the heck is Dave Dowson?

 

Runs Treelife AC.

 

An old 'name' in the industry (meant with respect) who worked behind the scenes on a lot of the Brit Standards, the guidance on bats and the arborist, things like that. Also known as 'God' when submitting assignments for moderation:biggrin:

 

A really interesting fellow to be taught by, whose own interests in arboriculture just enthuses everyone the class. Lots of 'in' jokes appear on here from ex or not-yet-ex students because the learning experience he creates. It's difficult to explain, but he's a great teacher that encourages and inspires.