Severed roots

[Stubby]

That's how I read it Gary.....

 

That's how I read it too . However I think the owner might notice they are gone

[Gary Prentice]

This then becomes an interesting ethical, moral and maybe even legal conundrum (I think that's the word I mean).

 

The client is the neighbour whose actions may have led to the failures.

Collecting evidence for the tree owner isn't in the best interests of the client.

Completing the works involves trespass and conversion/theft by removing the tree from the owners property.

 

A tangled web.

[Stubby]

This then becomes an interesting ethical, moral and maybe even legal conundrum (I think that's the word I mean).

 

The client is the neighbour whose actions may have led to the failures.

Collecting evidence for the tree owner isn't in the best interests of the client.

Completing the works involves trespass and conversion/theft by removing the tree from the owners property.

 

A tangled web.

 

I'm on the edge of my seat

[treequip]

I'm on the edge of my seat

 

Make yourself comfy mate, any fireworks aren't likely to start until the week end, pass the popcorn......

 

I had a phone call last night from the neighbour asking/pleading me to get rid of the stumps before the owners come back from holiday on Friday.

[10 Bears]

This then becomes an interesting ethical, moral and maybe even legal conundrum (I think that's the word I mean).

 

The client is the neighbour whose actions may have led to the failures.

Collecting evidence for the tree owner isn't in the best interests of the client.

Completing the works involves trespass and conversion/theft by removing the tree from the owners property.

 

A tangled web.

 

This is a good summary of the situation, indeed a tangled web. Gary's review is spot on IMO, particularly the last point regarding trespass/theft etc.

 

I would be hesitant to do the works immediately for the client, just on these grounds alone. It could be that this situation leads to a significant falling out between the neighbours, and the aggrieved tree owner, ends up taking legal recovery measures from the clumsy neighbour, which could include seeking prosecution of the OP for the reasons highlighted above.

 

You have to bear in mind that home-owner insurance often comes with legal dispute fees as part of the policy and this is exactly the sort of situation that they are there for.

 

As stated above - steer clear of the job until the fireworks begin to fly on Friday!

[Vespasian]

What could be done is get the phone number of the owner of the tree and ring the fella up...

Explain the situation to the owner without dropping the neighbor in it, and see if its OK to get on with the removal...

 

That way all parties are happy... and one is none the wiser to why it might have fallen down...

 

The fella gets paid for removing the tree, the neighbors happy the evidence has gone, and the owner is happy the neighbors paid for the job... everyone ends up happy and none the worse for it....

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

What could be done is get the phone number of the owner of the tree and ring the fella up...

Explain the situation to the owner without dropping the neighbor in it, and see if its OK to get on with the removal...

 

That way all parties are happy... and one is none the wiser to why it might have fallen down...

 

The fella gets paid for removing the tree, the neighbors happy the evidence has gone, and the owner is happy the neighbors paid for the job... everyone ends up happy and none the worse for it....

 

 

Your approach (commendably In an ideal world of love & peace💝) misses out the potential for historical relationship issues between the neighbours and mundane matters of law.

 

Meanwhile back in the bleak reality of suburbia, I see a potential minefield!

[eggsarascal]

If the tree went over after the (new?) Fence was erected I'd of thought it would have taken some of the fence with it.

[Shane]

Well, we went round there today to have a look.

The tree officer turned up and confirmed the two knacked trees were not TPOd .

 

The neighbour the other side told me the root damage was done about three weeks ago but he was also aware that the owners had discussed and agreed with the 'culpable' neighbour that the mess can be cleared up and they would discuss the percentages of payments when they return from holiday. That tied in with what the guy told me on the phone.

 

I have his agreement to my ts and cs including full payment (some of which he may/may not recover from the owners) on a text.

 

We started the clear-up (but not touching the stumps/roots). Soon after the owner's mum turned up and she was aware we might be there - so all good.

 

She asked to see the root damage and she also took some piccies.

She thanked us for doing a good and careful job working around the shagged 5 bar gate and brick pillar. She wished us well and went on her way.

 

There seems no issue with the owners and us being on their land. The Mum insisted that we leave the roots (as agreed with everyone) as a basis for 'discussions' over the apportionment of costs.

 

It also turns out that the children of the owners are great friends with the children of the neighbour so they may be grown up enough to remain friends.

 

Having said that - due to the actions of the neighbour's contractors the owners have lost two 35ft trees, a very wide 5 bar gate, a brick pier and a decorative concrete ball which used to adorn the brick pier. Also numerous shrubs have been flattened along with a small hlly which looks a tad insecure and the possible damage to a TPOd deodar just a few feet away.

 

If they were friends before, this will be a big test of that friendship.

 

Anyway, site now fairly tidy, logs spoken for and chips delivered to local stables.

 

I will update you at the weekend.

 

PS the owner's mum said she saw the contractors tearing at the roots with a JCB a few weeks ago. When she challenged them they said it would be OK they...

 

Knew what they were doing!

 

Ha ha ha

[waterbuoy]

Can't help but think that it is the contractors and/or their insurers who should be paying for this!