A Conundrum.

[treequip]

Ok . Don't want a turf war . You gob off in Saddleworth and I will spout BS in West Sussex .

 

That's workable, can we draw a line somewhere in the midlands, I will gladly ceed Birmingham to you:laugh1:

[Stubby]

That's workable, can we draw a line somewhere in the midlands, I will gladly ceed Birmingham to you:laugh1:

 

You can have Birmingham if you want I cant shout that loud

[Alinicoll]

Surly if the tree owner is taking reasonable steps to deal with dead wood and any forseeable failure then falling twigs, seeds etc come under the same sort of area as leaves blocking gutters.

 

Having taken what sounds like more than reasonable steps to make the tree as safe as possible its highly unlikely any negligence has occurred.

 

As has already been said, having taken steps to deal with reasonable hazards any damage should then come down to the vehicle owners insurance. He could cover the van to prevent minor damage but chooses not to.

 

At the end of the day you can do as you please within your own property but if you insist on parking under a tree then expect bits to drop on it. Unfortunately you can't tell that to a stubborn person.

[daltontrees]

Gary, here's an idea. Put in a TPO application to remove all the overhanging branches. State (as you must in a TPO app) the reason and that you foresee dmage to the camper van. Give the reason as preventing damage to neighbour's vehicle. Inevitably, after Council stops laughing and reads between the lines, you will get a refusal. Any sunbsequent damage that was foreseeable the Council compensates for. Any that isn't is a perfect defence against negligence. Any miniscule claim will be thrown out of court as de minimus if nothing else. And the costs of court will be borne by the neighbour.

 

Mr Camper van can then direct his irrational rage at the Council and the courts. In effect the TPO is convenient to your client in this case because it takes the decision to butcher the tree out of his hands.

[Stubby]

Gary, here's an idea. Put in a TPO application to remove all the overhanging branches. State (as you must in a TPO app) the reason and that you foresee dmage to the camper van. Give the reason as preventing damage to neighbour's vehicle. Inevitably, after Council stops laughing and reads between the lines, you will get a refusal. Any sunbsequent damage that was foreseeable the Council compensates for. Any that isn't is a perfect defence against negligence. Any miniscule claim will be thrown out of court as de minimus if nothing else. And the costs of court will be borne by the neighbour.

 

Mr Camper van can then direct his irrational rage at the Council and the courts. In effect the TPO is convenient to your client in this case because it takes the decision to butcher the tree out of his hands.

 

I like this idea .

[agg221]

Gary, here's an idea. Put in a TPO application to remove all the overhanging branches. State (as you must in a TPO app) the reason and that you foresee dmage to the camper van. Give the reason as preventing damage to neighbour's vehicle. Inevitably, after Council stops laughing and reads between the lines, you will get a refusal. Any sunbsequent damage that was foreseeable the Council compensates for. Any that isn't is a perfect defence against negligence. Any miniscule claim will be thrown out of court as de minimus if nothing else. And the costs of court will be borne by the neighbour.

 

Mr Camper van can then direct his irrational rage at the Council and the courts. In effect the TPO is convenient to your client in this case because it takes the decision to butcher the tree out of his hands.

 

Interestingly, this is a rather similar approach to the one I am taking with a tree-hating neighbour.

 

In our case, the tree is a modest sycamore which is maintained as a pollard/regularly topped depending on your point of view. It is on land adjacent to our house, which we currently rent. The neighbour in question is on the opposite side of a narrow lane and their bedroom windows back right onto the road. They dislike the view of the tree and want it removed.

 

They are pushy and aggressive about it (coming into our garden uninvited to shout about it, trying to follow me into the house to continue shouting when I tell them that no, I am not cutting down the tree right this instant just because I happen to be carrying a chainsaw etc). This gets my back up, so I am not predisposed to help. That said, I do pollard it about every 5yrs which seems to me to be a reasonable compromise, rather than just letting it grow huge and overhang their house in a passive/aggressive response.

 

The trouble is, you still have to live with them next door and people can be irrational and make life unpleasant. In our case for example they come into our garden when we are out and cut down things they don't like. Nothing major, but I suspect that if I escalate things over the tree, they will escalate their actions too, so pragmatically, much as I dislike this conclusion, as things stand it would be easier if it went.

 

However, because I don't really want to do this, I am hiding behind trying to get a TPO on it (unlikely given what it is, but the council are having a think) and the fact that it is not our land so I don't own it. I have told them that it belongs to a Mr & Mrs Jones who lived in Yorkshire in 1988 (this is true) and that we make direct payments into their bank account (also true) so do not have their address (not true). I have told them that if they touch it without permission from Mr & Mrs Jones I will report them to the police for criminal damage (true). I am hoping that they manage to draw blanks on finding a route forward and I can point at it not being my fault - much as suggested above (fwiw the land is also unregistered).

 

I am not sure whether the above adds anything to the thread, other than venting my frustration and indicating my empathy, but I concur with the overall sentiment that people are the problem!

 

Alec

[felixthelogchopper]

Interestingly, this is a rather similar approach to the one I am taking with a tree-hating neighbour.

 

In our case, the tree is a modest sycamore which is maintained as a pollard/regularly topped depending on your point of view. It is on land adjacent to our house, which we currently rent. The neighbour in question is on the opposite side of a narrow lane and their bedroom windows back right onto the road. They dislike the view of the tree and want it removed.

 

They are pushy and aggressive about it (coming into our garden uninvited to shout about it, trying to follow me into the house to continue shouting when I tell them that no, I am not cutting down the tree right this instant just because I happen to be carrying a chainsaw etc). This gets my back up, so I am not predisposed to help. That said, I do pollard it about every 5yrs which seems to me to be a reasonable compromise, rather than just letting it grow huge and overhang their house in a passive/aggressive response.

 

The trouble is, you still have to live with them next door and people can be irrational and make life unpleasant. In our case for example they come into our garden when we are out and cut down things they don't like. Nothing major, but I suspect that if I escalate things over the tree, they will escalate their actions too, so pragmatically, much as I dislike this conclusion, as things stand it would be easier if it went.

 

However, because I don't really want to do this, I am hiding behind trying to get a TPO on it (unlikely given what it is, but the council are having a think) and the fact that it is not our land so I don't own it. I have told them that it belongs to a Mr & Mrs Jones who lived in Yorkshire in 1988 (this is true) and that we make direct payments into their bank account (also true) so do not have their address (not true). I have told them that if they touch it without permission from Mr & Mrs Jones I will report them to the police for criminal damage (true). I am hoping that they manage to draw blanks on finding a route forward and I can point at it not being my fault - much as suggested above (fwiw the land is also unregistered).

 

I am not sure whether the above adds anything to the thread, other than venting my frustration and indicating my empathy, but I concur with the overall sentiment that people are the problem!

 

Alec

 

You're more forgiving than me, Alec. I would have got them on camera and then had them for criminal damage.

[Stephen Blair]

My nieghbour has 2 nice Landrovers and an expensive looking Rib, him and his wife are really nice people and their garden boundaries mine.

2 of my trees are close to the boundary and overhang his parking area more than mine.

He never asked or mentioned the trees but it was something I was aware of when I bought the property as did I notice my other nieghbours trees close to my conservatory on the other side, I mentioned to him my concern and offered to remove them at no cost if that was ok but in no way were they extremely dangerous, just taller than the distance from the base to my house.

Long story short I cut down my 2 to remove the risk and liability and I cut down my nieghbours 3 to save him the same stress.

Everyone happy, they are only trees.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

I'd lob a handful of bread onto the roof every night.

The bird crap will soon put him off.

 

Any seagulls in the area Gary?

 

A daily fistful of mackerel guts (from the tree owner) and the van roof would look like a welders bench after a week! Kind of make the odd twig an inconsequence!!

 

[skc101fc]

Corr, I bet that lot smells gorgeous on a summers day. Would love to see him step into his van ,crack open the skylight and breath in deeply with pride.- then turn purple an puke everywhere. ...