benedmonds

I went to a free training event from Natwest "How to Use Facebook to Generate Leads." The instructor thought I needed a twitter account and should be regularilly posting.. I was not convinced... They also said paying to boost a post was good.. I tried, you can allegedly target a physical area, age group etc.. Utter rubbish.. My £60 got my post seen by thousands (5 or 6 think). I had about 30 responses, most were, "sorry I pressed by mistake." A few were for services we don't supply and several were in Spanish...

My brother inlaw was Sicilian, starting a business in Sicily had all sorts of additional problems.

And its still not easy to make good money in my experience..

The boss is buying kit necessary for work..? If he didn't have saws and vehicles he wouldn't be able to pay anyone anything...?

..Should.... I did an appeal for a crappy grey poplar in a community housing group. 12 residents living in this trees shadow with roots lifting the pavement a shoots coming up in half their front gardens. They all came out on mass at the appeal and still the pins inspector upheld the lpa's refusal. Only one resident from the other side of the estate wanted to keep it.. I despair at the whole TPO process..

The bungalows are at least 20 years old.. But I disagree with your premis .. If trees are thought to be important lpa's should not give planning to biuld close when they are obviously going to become an issue..

But what better reason is there.... It is a healthy tree but in the wrong place. The owner and neighbours want it gone the lpa doesn't. It is down to an opinion and opinions differ..

The first reason for the refusal of the second application is valid and I would not have made the application to reduce the tree had they not suggested it..... The proposed works would have a detrimental affect on the appearance of the tree which makes a significant contribution to the appearance and character of the area. The local planning authority is not satisfied that there are any reasons for the works that are sufficient to over-ride the beneficial impact that the tree has on the character of the area that would otherwise be seriously reduced.

I have also in the past made multiple applications for different works to the same tree at the same time, but in this case I didn't, and still don't think the reduction is a good idea.. I only changed it as the LPA said they would not give permission for the fell and we should change it to a reduce. The client wasn't happy but wanted something done to the tree. They LPA have now rejected the reduce that they recommended we apply for..... and withdrawn my original application to fell... I am not going to appeal the reduce as it was their stupid idea but I would appeal the fell as it is a sensible idea...

Reduce by 2m.... Pointless I agree but the client wanted something done.

The council withdrew the initial application to fell when they told me to change the application to a reduce... I have asked for them to reinstate it and refuse it so | can appeal... Hopefully they won't prolong the process by another 8 weeks by making me reapply..... The client really doesn't have the resources to undertake the works and is definitely not willing to pay for the appeal. I have found this regularly happens when you tell them it will take a year and you can't be sure of the outcome... I could do and do sometimes make appeals without charging the client but it's all my time and I have already wasted enough with the first 2 applications and chasing for decisions...

I would have thought that was the case.. They have really wound me up now as 13 weeks ago I put in an application to fell. 5 weeks later the council suggested they would not give consent but I should withdraw the application and apply to reduce.. Personally I thought this was a stupid idea as its a leggy 20m ash. The client wanted something however. I assumed doing as recomended by the lpa I would get consent in the 3 remaining weeks.. But no.. the lpa decided that they would restart the clock.. 8 weeks later and still no consent so I chase only to finally get a refusal to reduce.

I have had a recent discussion with a TO who took great umbrage for my justification to first remove and later at their request reduce a tree... They felt that my use of the word hazardous was completely unacceptable and that I should not have used it. Their argument was that the council would only listen to a justification that was inline with their tree policy, which basically says trees can only be pruned if Dead, Dying, Dangerous or causing damage.. How can that be reasonable in an urban environment? How else can I justify works to a basically healthy tree that is just too big for its location...? The 20m tall twin stem ash tree in a 10m long garden overhanging a bungalow.. This was my Justification: The tree completely dominates the garden (see aerial photo) and is the wrong species for the location. The tree causes considerable mess, with leaf fall, sap and bird excrement making sitting in the garden if not dangerous, hazardous. The tree has twin limbs at approx 3m. This compression fork is an inherent point of weakness and failure at this point would lead to to significant damage to the surrounding properties. The council has indicated that it will not agree removing the tree therefore the reduction has been proposed as a compromise.

Not many years ago we were paying to get rid or spread on the fields.. It's not going to make you rich but it easily pays for the loading.. We sell £3 or £4Ks worth a year. I struggle to understand the wood chip market.. We have been paid: £12 a ton for chip (we load) £6 a ton for mixed arb arisings (they supplied telehandler to load) £23 a ton for beech logs (road side) and I still struggle to see how driving lorries full of woodchip up and down the country makes sense..

Biomas companies pay us £12-£14 a ton for mixed wood chip from arb arisings..

Don't fall for the bait. Keep posting.. People go on and on about grey areas with driver licencing, tachos, red diesel etc. Most of it is pretty straight fwd even if your local traffic cop doesnt necessarily know them... Lots of folk choose to ignore or try to dodge the rules.. It is good to have someone on the forum who knows the rules. Rather then someone who thinks they do..

Especially when you add the stove installation costs mine was about £5,000 and ongoing maintenance, sweeping etc.... BUT I would still love my stove

...But if you worked out what that would sell for you could pay for a lot of gas and insulation... Financially firewood does not often make sense for either the producer or the user.. We process wood from arb waste as an extra to fill days and to give guys a way of topping up their income from working saturdays. We don't do much and charge £85 a bulk bag. I have a log burner and use 5 ir 6 bags a year because it's nice.. I am sure if I sold the logs it would easily pay for the additional gas I used if I did not use logs.. Logs are a luxury product that cost alot to produce either in time or machines. Unfortunately production can be low skilled, there are people who are willing to work for peanuts and others who do it as a hobby.

I was thinking about climbing past decay in the stem to dismantle the tops. If there's a nice clear field in front so you can fell them in a oner though, would be a great job. There isn't it is a back garden and they want to make it nice underneath..

Views on reducing by 25% (topping) pops in a back garden... The end one is FUBARED and needs to come out, conifers being reduced, TO won't give permission to remove but will for 25% reduction..? Is it just me who thinks it is a stupid idea...

That would be a good turnaround for a regular appeal in my experience. I have had some go on for over 12 months...

I spoke with the TO and their opinion was that "they hope to get it done in 8 weeks." I thought it was a statutory duty to do within 8 weeks and when I mentioned this the reply was "you can appeal for non-determination" and then he hung up on me....

If it was on the doorstep I would have considered it, but it is 20 miles away from home so I chose to ignore that particular request.

Very low to none..