Parish council agree to fell tree - how to stop?

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

This has been debated. The encroachment needs to be substantial to the point of being actionable at-law before the exemption applies, and the exemption does not allow cutting back to the boundary, just enough cutting back as is necessary to remove the (actionable) nuisance.

 

Was it this thread Jules?

 

http://arbtalk.co.uk/forum/general-chat/87741-neighbor-dispute.html

 

Must have missed it first time round....

 

Just read it end to end..... Debated but not resolved perhaps? And that would certainly reenforce the view of the TO I recently had a conversation with which was something like.... "...I wish this scenario would finally go to the High Court and give us some clarity on interpretation...."

 

I'm looking at Mynors 23.6.5, and thinking back to the recent seminar at Barchams.

 

And noting your closing comment on the thread "...This aspect that Gary raised about the distinction between encroachment, nuisance and actionable nuisance is as you suggest unpredictable in the average situation. I am torn, as I always have been..."

 

And your suggestion "... it's a matter of degree..."

 

Then I'm left thinking the same as the TO I mentioned above! Since I've got one just like this potentially coming up at the end of the month I'll see how it plays out.

 

Mindful of what others said in that thread about lost time, additional hassle & admin associated with such scenarios though, I think it'll only be taken forward as a price for the tree work and any additional / associated administrative arrangements at an hourly rate.

[Two Acres]

That didn't look like a £300 report !!! Specifically on that tree ,it may have been part of a survey on all the parish tree stock.

If the poster put up some more accurate pictures of the structure,health of tree we may be able to comment more accurately.

The fell and replant option is an easy one but doesn't always work ,we've all seen so many sick ,drought ridden vandalised young trees.

 

It may not be a report thats specific to that tree Philip, it could well be part of a village wide survey to be fair. At he moment I don't have all the facts.

[Two Acres]

If they fell it without consent due to it being in a CA then they will be in trouble. Make the PC aware of this.

 

We'll be doing exactly that first thing tomorrow morning Hodge

[Two Acres]

Can we see some pics of the tree in its current state ?

 

I'd like to be able to do that Matty, but I can't as I'm on holiday at the moment. I'll see if a friend will go shoot some. To be honest it looks very much as it does in the picture I posted earlier in the thread, just a little bigger. If it was in my wood it wouldn't be giving me any cause for concern and I'd be very pleased to have it.

[Gary Prentice]

I'd like to be able to do that Matty, but I can't as I'm on holiday at the moment. I'll see if a friend will go shoot some. To be honest it looks very much as it does in the picture I posted earlier in the thread, just a little bigger. If it was in my wood it wouldn't be giving me any cause for concern and I'd be very pleased to have it.

 

I think MattyF means at the crownbreak (top of the stem where all the co-dominant stems start) so we can try to assess the structural faults identified in the report.

[Two Acres]

I think MattyF means at the crownbreak (top of the stem where all the co-dominant stems start) so we can try to assess the structural faults identified in the report.

 

Thanks for the clarification Gary

[Gary Prentice]

Thanks for the clarification Gary

 

No problem, and for the rest of the rabble:biggrin: pics of the nubile women chained to the tree.

[daltontrees]

I know what you mean, BUT not everyone reads all the relevant threads and new members won't have seen them.

 

Besides, it's often a case of semantics rather than not actually knowing the difference between the two processes.

 

Fair enough paul, I know you know the difference and for the average contractor wanting to stay in the right there is little actual difference between notifying the Council in writing ina CA and applying for consent in writing ina TPO.

 

So at this point I have to split my attitude on this into Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde. The gentle doctor in me says, OK I will continue patiently pointing out as others often do on Arbtalk to those less well versed but eager to learn that there is a subtle but occasionally very important difference between the two processes - after all I get much from Arbtalk from experienced and learned people, so I should give back without bitterness. Mr. Hyde meantime wants to shout ' oh FFS, if you are new to this have a look at the Government website, your local Council website or spend 10 seconds doing a search here on Arbtalk or even just google it and any of these options will give a clear and frank explanation of the difference...', the subtext being '... you lazy git, make an effort'.

 

Time and other people's laziness has obviously made me cynical, and I apologise. But if someone on t'internet wants a fish it is hard to know whether he wants to be given one or to be taught to fish. I will try to be less snippy, knowing that I will continue occasionally to fail. I put it down to sleep deprivation, my seemingly perennial companion.

[daltontrees]

Was it this thread Jules?

 

http://arbtalk.co.uk/forum/general-chat/87741-neighbor-dispute.html

 

Must have missed it first time round....

 

 

That's the most recent example, yes. I don't think a High Court decision would really box off the question, it woul really need to be Court of Appeal or House of Lords to issue a codifying type of decision for public policy reasons. No-one is liley to take it that far for a triviality. The law is supposedly settled on this ussue but it is the one area of tree law that comes up again and again because t seems counter-intuitive. But tree encroachments are different from any others, it is the tree that encroaches slowly, creating a structure on another's property, yet to oblige a tree owner to ensure it never encroaches would be a ridiculous imposition by society, one that would be unneccessary for 99.9% of urban trees.

 

So I suspect the law will remain that as far as branches are concerned the tree owner doesn't have to do anything until he is asked to and even then need do nothing until there is material harm to enjoyment. That might be damage, it might be loss of light, it might be loss of views but the courts might chuck it out if it's de minimis (trivial). With ensuing irrecoverable legal fees.

 

Even if a civil action succeeds, will the court order the branches to be removed by the tree owner, or will it just award damages? And in between, would it award the costs already incurred by a neighbour for cutting back the nuisance? A clear judgement would be lovely.

[Two Acres]

No problem, and for the rest of the rabble:biggrin: pics of the nubile women chained to the tree.

 

I'm getting impression that getting the naked women chained to the tree may well be the answer to this one