daltontrees

Crataegus crus-galli or a close relative. Cockspur Thorn. Similar in many ways to Crataegus monogyna, the more common Hawthorn, except in leaf shape. Treat it as you would a Hawthorn and you can't go far wrong.

The leaves are Lime, the wood could be Cherry.

I think you need to explain a Tree Health and Safety Report. What is that? Is it something different from a Tree Risk Assessment?

Quite! You didn't know sycamore as well as you thought you did.

Looks like Wild Cherry or Gean (Prunus avium)

Interesting question. 'Poisonous' is a bit dramatic. There is documented evidence of Broom being of low toxicity to grazing animals. That is, if it is ingested (swallowed). I can't find anything that suggests that it would be toxic if inhaled. Unlike gorse which can be dry and dusty when cut, Broom seems to remain green and wet when cut. I can't imagine throwing up so much particulate matter during cutting that its ingestion could give rise to any measurable toxicity. If there was the slightest breeze I wouldn't even consider wearing a mask. Maybe if the terrain was particularly enclosed. Masks can be misleading, though, unless you are sucking every breath through an appropriate grade of material they may merely give a false sense of protection. I have always found hard physical work while wearing an effective mask pretty challenging, after all you are needing to draw in a lot of air and get a rid of the same amount of damp air.

Fabulous set of pictures, thanks David.

The BCT methodology is free. The microguide is free. Bat awareness training is about £140. Worth doing the endoscope training too.

I've seen a copy but don't have it. I'm not planning to get it either. 90% of it is way beyond arb use i.e. it specifies specialist training or qualifications. You'd need to be an ecologist to use some parts of it, and a bat license for other bits. But crucially, ecologists don't use it anyway, they prefer the BCT methods. Are you looking to do surveys professionally? If so, the very minimum you'll require is bat awareness training and the microguide. I do about 1 report a month, and have found that the microguide is not enough to sign off reports confidently and competently. A more thorough grounding in the BCT methodology, records of local bat populations, habitat awareness and a bit of experience in ruling out unsuitable features is needed. If a client relies on your report for a planning application, you need to be able to back up your findings at appeal.

Here's my assorted comments. I have or have had Sony Vaio, Acer and HP laptops. The Acer is the best by far. The HP is the newest and works fine except the mousepad and driver combination is a pain in the arse, so much so that I will never buy a HP laptop again. That said, apparently Microsoft is going to force manufacturers to adopt its mouse drivers in future, bringing HP's legendarily bad mouse performance blinking into the light of the 21st century. Solid state drives are the bizz, but always back them up regularly. I found out the hard way that data on failed hard drives can be partly salvaged but when a SSD goes, it goes, and there's nothing left. I run Libre's free Excel and Word equivalents on the HP, wouldn't pay Microsoft the annual fee again. On the older Acer I still have a perpetual license Office suite, it's not updated any more but that makes no odds to me. It might even be worth buying an old laptop and taking the Office off it onto a newer machine. Another good thing about Libre is, it isn't constantly checking with Microsoft for non-existent updates and licenses. What always slowed down my laptops was the anti virus. I tried McAfee and Norton and they were hopeless, felt like the latop was their slave. Bitdefender was really quick and didn't slow up the boot. But for the last 2 years I have done without any AV, just using Windows Defender which seems to do the job for free and minimal interference. Now and again it does a full scan without warning but it can be scheduled to do this during the night. My conclusion is that no matter what hardware you have the gains in speed will be negated by software, it's always the slowest factor unless you're gaming or streaming. And no matter how lazy I am about deleting old photos, CAD drawings, pdfs etc. I never come close to worrying about memory capacity. Software is the killer, some programmes you never use can be massive and can be scanning your files regularly in the background. You just need to have a clear-out now and again, switch off all the unnecessary checks for updates etc. And go with the lightest AV, if at all. And always do back-ups. I have learnt over the years to shun Chrome and Internet Explorer and all their successors. Firefox is without doubt the best option, it's privacy settings are simple and mean that Google and MS are not farming you for data and slowing things up. I have used Firefox without a single hitch for 5 years now and although I have Chrome on my phone and on one laptop for emergencies it is the font of evil unless you have an IT degree to allow you to tame it. Conclusion of the conclusion, for simple set-ups any laptop will do (except for the HP mousepad issue). It's all about the software.

Amelanchier. Besides, Zelkova flowers are nothing like that...

You are totally out of order. Sticking a couple of smileys after comments doesn't make them OK. If you could see yourself as others see you when you post on here, you might reconsider your approach to trying to be persuasive. It's not just this thread, it's a view I have arrived at over many threads. I can't stop you posting but I don't have to stand by while you misinterpret and then have a go at the opinions of someone as reasonable and gentle (and extremely unwell) as Gary. You might apologise, if you've got it in you. You're entitled to your opinion, and your behaviour appears to me to be of the sort that only the anonymity of an assumed name on an internet forum will let you away with, but don't imagine that your rhetoric is in any way persuasive.

NO, that sort of language should be deleted. This is a public forum and there are more imaginative and less offensive less crude ways of expressing opinions. If that sort of language is not controlled and censured then there's no end to it.

Don't waste any more time looking - there are no restrictions.

That's a very compelling argument.

One of my favourite artists, Paul Signac "Sunset, Herblay", I was delighted to find an example of a tree painted by a Pointilist. Pointilism is creating a picture with dots of different coloured paint. The lighting in the gallery was rubbish, photo is not the best.

Yes that's what I meant about being 'sneaky'. Nothing to do with TPO law but part of a full answer for the OP. And quite rightKJ to mention conveyancing incompetence too.

Done. Only took 2 minutes.

The replanting obligation runs with the land. The new owner would be liable. It would be a matter of contract whether the seller passed that obligation on to the new owner. If he didn't and was sneaky about it he might still be liable for the cost of complying with the replanting obligation. I expect your contract is with the previous owner and will not have been assigned to the new owner without your knowledge and agreement. Summary - owner for the time being is liable. You're probably out of the loop now.

Not quite a 'fact', there is no legal requirement for PII. But a consultant would be crazy not to have it. And any client who uses an uninsured consultant would be just as crazy.

If in doubt, yes. But what I'm saying is there will be cases where you don't need to notify and wait 6 weeks.

I'll be one of the plenty, but maybe not just on the interpretation of 'nuisance'. The relevant Regulation says "so far as may be necessary for the prevention or abatement of a nuisance". My dictionary says "prevent" means to stop happening", it's not just a synonym for "abate". So, depending on whether one thinks the "nuisance" has to be actionable, the Regulation either means 'prevent a nuisance becoming so bad that it's actionable' or it means 'prevent a nuisance'. Anyone can look long and hard for a definition of 'actionable' but there isn't one (although one is hinted at in Lemmon v Webb). It was adopted as a test for use of TPO exemptions in Smith v Oliver and Perrin v Northampton on the basis that there must be actual or imminent damage, but in more recent case law the Master of the Rolls thankfully dispelled the myth that nuisance must involve damage, stating that it just needs to be a deprivation of someone's right to enjoy their property. Simple rights like growing plants, being able to get past your house to the back garden. These need not involve damage, and it would be pretty shit law that didn't allow someone to abate this type of nuisance despite there being no damage nor any prospect of damage. So there's my firmly held view. The nuisance can be of any kind, and does not need to be damage or the apprehension of it, and since prevention of nuisance is as exempt as abatement, the 'actionable' test becomes one of whether it will become serious enough to be actionable rather than whether it is serious enough to be actionable. I'd go further and say that the seriousness issue is measured only by the 'so far as may be necessary' test, the actionable test being somewhat redundant. One could (and if anyone wants to see how it would look, I will) draw up a sequential scale of no foreseeable nuisance to actual material damage or prevention of use of property, and it is inevitable that prevention will precede actionable on that scale in any scenario.

Quite right. Hedges can comprise trees, and in a CA cutting them is a breach, hedge or no hedge. In the OP's case, they could possibly have been cut under the 'abatement of nuisance' exemption.

I thought it was clear form the original post that the subby was interested in the generalities rather than the specifics of this case. From what you say, if both subbies had insisted on working 3 days you would have done something else to make it work. I've been booked in to sub and then had the job cancelled the day before. I got nothing in in return. There were genuine reasons for cancellation. The contractor was one of my regulars so I just absorbed it. Had he done it a couple of times I would have binned him. It's a free market. One could rightfully insist on a 3rd day's pay. The contractor, if he had no other work on for me, would have to pay it from his own pocket for me to sit at home, which I think is harsh. So there's rights and there's pragmatism, two different things. Neither the contractor nor the subby will want to get the reputation for being unreasonable, regardless of legal rights. So for the long haul, I don't see the point in rocking a good boat.

Funny enough I looked for the pimples and couldn't see them and that was one factor in my leaning towards Auricularia. Isn't Exidia yellow when dessicated, and dark only when hydrated? I confess, I'm in Scotland and Auricularia is very common here but Exidia isn't even on my radar. So I could be wrong but it would be good to put it on my radar only from a position of reliable identification features. An additional confusion is that Tremella mesenterica is also known as Witches Butter.