TPO applications

[Gray git]

Simply put Edward I didn't want the tree officer who I've spent a lot if time gaining the trust and respect of to drive past and think as the agent and applying contractor I've done a crap poor standard job so felt I needed to make it clear I no longer was handling the work. If you had seen some of the trees the owner had expertly pruned himself with ladders and black and dekker reciprocating saw you'd have been concerned too.

There is no way he'd have been able to carry out the work to the standard required.

So put simply I was covering my own arse and reputation!

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

 

I asked them how do I get on the Councils list of approved/recommended contractors, knowing of course they didn't have one. The tree officer told me they didn't have one.

 

Ed

 

Increasingly, anecdotally, Councils / LPAs are linking to the 'Find a Tree Surgeon' section of the Arb Assoc website to assist here...and probably to avoid fielding that difficult question about "can you recommend anybody?"

 

Having been in that position previously, as a LPA TO (sorry, Local Planning Authority based Tree Officer) we did have an (informal / historic) approved list with half a dozen or so contractor details but were latterly told to withdraw it to protect the Councils interest / integrity.

 

So, 'pm' me for your 'ArbAC' assessment application forms

 

Cheers..

Paul

[TIMON]

Hi

 

Back in the day when I was a contractor once the client had accepted the quote and signed the contract for the job I would do the application. I used to include in my contract terms and conditions a bit about charging them for administration, which included the application/notification if they subsequently pulled out.

 

I can't see a problem with checking the published registers and contacting the applicant. You are contractors, you are running a business, and the purpose is to make money. Builders do it all the time.

 

When I was contracting I would contact applicants from the published registers. I wouldn't however, contact applicants who had an agent, with one exception.

 

In one particular local authority which didn't have a list of approved/recommended contractors the tree officer used to recommend a particular contractor. Now that's what I call very low indeed. This cost me quite a lot of work, and I know because potential/lost clients would tell me they were using the contractor recommended by the tree officer. Hence I used to write to this contractors clients.

 

Eventually, and no doubt at the behest of the contractor, the tree officer contacted me to 'warn me off'. I asked them how do I get on the Councils list of approved/recommended contractors, knowing of course they didn't have one. The tree officer told me they didn't have one. So I asked how I got on his personal list of approved/recommended contractors, at this point the tree officer started to back off. I pointed out I was doing nothing wrong, he shouldn't be recommending contractors, it was costing me money, and if he had a problem with what I was doing I would take it up through the Councils complaints procedure with a view to recovering monies which I knew I had lost because of his actions. I never heard any more, but he continued to recommend the one contractor, albeit not so much at first, and I continued to write to their clients.

 

Now, as a local authority tree officer, in a local authority that does not have a list of approved/recommended contractors, I will not, no matter what, recommend anyone. You should stand or fall on your reputation as a contractor.

 

Once they paid you started to cause mischief. Why? What interest does the tree officer have except to ensure the works are carried out as consented, and they can only determine that after the event. What is it they could explain to your ex-client that isn't clear in the decision notice. If I'd been the ex-client I'd have complained to the Council. If I'd been the tree officer I'd have left well alone.

 

You have to resort to frightening the client into accepting you as their contractor!

 

Ed

 

 

I think saying that we are"frightening them" into using us is perhaps a bit harsh.

If as a business we commit finance and resources to advertising then surely we are entitled to protect the work we have secured through it.

Merely pointing out that firms who try and poach work in this manner are obviously more ruthless in their dealings why shouldn't we advise caution??

[AA Teccie (Paul)]

Hi

 

Paul. I still have my own teeth, but they're getting rather long and the old bones baulk at the thought of climbing trees. Way back then I was an AAAC, and the nearest one to the LPA concerned. Which I did point out to the tree officer.

 

Nowadays I always point to the list of AAAC's on the AA's web site when asked to recommend a tree surgeon, but I won't recommend any particular tree surgeon.

 

I have to say that in the last few years the AA have done well at getting more AAAC's which helps as they were thin on the ground here, still are. I'm not in the south east.

 

Ed

 

Edward, forgive me, I'm afraid the penny's not dropping here in terms of recognising / identifying you as a previous AAAC

 

Thank you for your approach here and, as you quite rightly point out, the website gives the opportunity to refer people without making a specific contractor recommendation.

 

AAAC nos. are increasing, fast approaching 300 now, but some areas are still quite sparse so lots of opportunities readers

 

Thanks for your reply here.

 

Cheers..

Paul

[Gray git]

Surely the point in having a tpo on a tree is to protect it and help prevent poor standards of work being subjected apon them??

And surely as an arb company trying to promote a high standard it should be encouraged that if we know it's about to go wrong it should be prevented if possible rather than see a perfectly healthy tree be damaged to a point it may become unviable much sooner than it should rather than sit back nd say wasn't me so not my problem and leave it to the council to pathetically pursue a prosecution.

[Joe Newton]

Surely the point in having a tpo on a tree is to protect it and help prevent poor standards of work being subjected apon them??

And surely as an arb company trying to promote a high standard it should be encouraged that if we know it's about to go wrong it should be prevented if possible rather than see a perfectly healthy tree be damaged to a point it may become unviable much sooner than it should rather than sit back nd say wasn't me so not my problem and leave it to the council to pathetically pursue a prosecution.

 

 

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Surely the point in having a tpo on a tree is to protect it and help prevent poor standards of work being subjected apon them??

And surely as an arb company trying to promote a high standard it should be encouraged that if we know it's about to go wrong it should be prevented if possible rather than see a perfectly healthy tree be damaged to a point it may become unviable much sooner than it should rather than sit back nd say wasn't me so not my problem and leave it to the council to pathetically pursue a prosecution.

 

 

 

Proactive has to be better than reactive!