This would be a shame!

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

I think the highways would call it encroachment and no-doubt the local bylaws say the same but it is also a trespass.

 

As one legal bright spark said to me "law will always take precedence over an absence of law". In other words, if the law of trespass is stronger than the laws governing encroachment, a legal bigwig will probably go for the trespass.

 

 

So..... that made me reach for the Mynors!

[mendiplogs]

 

So..... that made me reach for the Mynors!

 

Hi all now on the one show thanks Jon

[Mesterh]

Truly is a shame but there's no chance the hedge will be allowed to stay like that.

 

No doubt the council and high ways have seen it but turned a blind eye until the complaints started. It will probably be fine within a couple of growing seasons though.

 

I wonder if anyone from on here will get the job?

[mendiplogs]

Truly is a shame but there's no chance the hedge will be allowed to stay like that.

 

No doubt the council and high ways have seen it but turned a blind eye until the complaints started. It will probably be fine within a couple of growing seasons though.

 

I wonder if anyone from on here will get the job?

 

Hi MEST that's what say on the one show mate thanks Jon

[samiad]

Hi Steve start a petition against cutting the hedge thanks John

 

a petition would be good. If 90% of the village want it preserving then surely they will see sense. hate stuff like this, mad and pathetic.

[flatyre]

Can he not argue the hedge was probably there before the path? And at over a hundred years old it is part of the village identity? or as others have said just tell the council to put it on the end of their "to-do" list after all the other obstructive hedges and trees have been dealt with.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Maybe a TO could offer some insight .....

 

Assuming a person suffering an encroachment / trespass has a right to abate the nuisance and assuming there doesn't need to be notice given of the intent to do so (although it might be considered neighbourly to do so) and assuming, whilst that right exists, financial liability for abating the nuisance lays with the person seeking to abate it, how is it that (as appears to be indicated in this example, and seems common) the council can require the work to be done or undertake the work and place a charge against the hedge owner?

 

Is this peculiar in some way to trees / hedges causing an obstruction to highways?

[daltontrees]

 

So..... that made me reach for the Mynors!

 

I think that you will find that the Highways Act doesn't concern itself with common law distinctions of trespass or encroachment, vegetation either is or isn't creating an unacceptable risk to users (pedestrians or vehicles). The situation is further complicated by concepts of vesting of land by highways authorities, comprising just the road surface and base and verges but not the air space above them or the ground below. I don't think Mynors covers this in a cogent way.

[daltontrees]

Maybe a TO could offer some insight .....

 

Assuming a person suffering an encroachment / trespass has a right to abate the nuisance and assuming there doesn't need to be notice given of the intent to do so (although it might be considered neighbourly to do so) and assuming, whilst that right exists, financial liability for abating the nuisance lays with the person seeking to abate it, how is it that (as appears to be indicated in this example, and seems common) the council can require the work to be done or undertake the work and place a charge against the hedge owner?

 

Is this peculiar in some way to trees / hedges causing an obstruction to highways?

In short, the answer to your last question is undoubtedly yes.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

In short, the answer to your last question is undoubtedly yes.

 

 

That was quick Jules!

 

That'll have to be (highways act) tomorrow's reading now!

 

Hoping to stay awake past the opening tunes of Question Time tonight!