AA Teccie (Paul)

Whilst, on the face of it, there is a (financial) 'conflict of interest' in the employer undertaking the equipment inspections ("thorough examinations,) assuming he/she is competent and qualified so to do, they are also the 'duty holder' with the ultimate responsibility for H&S in the business. I don't believe either the LOLER Regs. themselves, nor the associated ACOP (Approved Code of Practice) refers to the 'competent person' (CP) requirements, it is the associated guidance that does (still better to be adhered to of course.) As far as the ArbAC Scheme is concerned, where the employer is said 'CP' we require a process of appeal (to an independent 3rd party) to be put in place and, generally, advise they check their insurer is happy with the arrangement. Cheers, Paul

You need to be properly assessed by a Occupational Health Specialist (OHS) and probably at Doctor level (Tier 4)...and who is competent in HAVS, respectfully not a GP. Gloves are helpful but mainly because they keep hands warm, improving blood circulation, rather than damping vibration. Battery powered machinery is the way forward. Regards, Paul

An alternative term I've come across is "crown restructuring" which you can't really argue with...but similarly that was more 'lopping' IMO, i.e. a (very) heavy reduction beyond any suitable secondary growth points but still leaving a framework for regeneration (I associate 'topping' being leaving a pole...generally speaking.) Timing = generally summer time is better as more time for the tree to respond and commence some sort of defense reaction...but there's undoubtedly nesting birds in that lot and possibly something more (bats?) Looks an awful job TBH so please allow 'more than' enough time as others have wisely said.

Hi Swinny, sorry I missed your post. I quite agree with your initial statement about plenty of good, competent, safe etc etc contractors working for LAs who aren't approved (by "the happy clappers club" ?) but then summat happened n you disappeared . Don't you agree tho that having a way of differentiating between you and those that aren't competent etc, and not necessarily the unscrupulous, would be beneficial to your business and the industry as a whole? I'm very happy to continue off forum, or directly (07971 995351,) should you wish to. Thanks.. Paul

Wish I could be more succinct Paul 'verbose' Smith

Hi Tom, £1.3m turn-over but only £47k surplus and the AA's range of activities is much wider than just the ARB Approved Contractor Scheme (which turns over circa £280k = £10k surplus, proportionately, for the scheme.) Whilst I'm open-minded to any / all suggestions how we can better / more effectively market and promote, in my mind there's no getting away from the fact we need to increase critical mass...so, "thank you" for helping with this. Paul

"CCC" (constructive criticism and concerns) Ian, all reasonable, fair n balanced...mostly ATB, Paul

Hey Ian, thanks for your "straight talkin", and valid, contribution here but what other industry accreditation schemes / trade associations are most clients aware of other than, for instance, CORGI / Gas Safe and maybe NICEIC / Fensa...because they're regulatory schemes, which we as an industry don't have, and as such all contractors have the logos on their vans. Hence it's a "by association" awareness (only very recently have I seen Gas Safe on TV.) In the commercial sector, ArbAC awareness is increasing as the scheme is registered on SSIP alongside CHAS / SAFEcontractor etc., commercial 'buyers' to better understand why if it's tree surgery services they require ARB Approved Contractor is the scheme they should choose ("work in progress.") With the (very) limited resources we have we consider the best strategy is to try to gain 'critical mass' from the industry itself, i.e. by attracting more good contractors to the scheme, and by encouraging LAs to support the cause and link websites. Hopin yer well.. Paul

Hi all, and thanks 'KTS Tom' for sticking with the process...I hope the reassessment went well. The issue of AA promotion, or 'lack of', is contentious as if I too were in your position I would want to see a greater presence in the Local Authority and public sectors to increase awareness and generate new business leads. However, sitting on "this side" of the fence it's a somewhat different picture...one involving a very limited resource both staff and financial. We do what we can, when/where we can...and where an opportunity arises (we did have a presence at Chelsea this year, albeit on the back of the RHS and APGH (All Parliamentary Group for Horticulture, of which the AA is an active member including 'lobbying' ministers on pan-industry wide issues, e.g. Biosecurity / skills shortages.) We offer 'marketing packs / materials' to AA Members and/or Branches to promote themselves and the AA/Schemes where they are exhibiting at County / Regional Shows etc. and, where an opportunity might arise to 'piggy-back' on, for instance, the Woodland Trust or RHS with whom we have developing relationships. I'm currently seeking to meet with as many LAs as I can, albeit on an ad-hoc basis as I travel around, to increase their awareness and seek their support / promotion of the schemes (increasingly LA websites link to https://www.trees.org.uk/Find-a-professional or the homepage.) In practice, those LAs who have ready access to a network of, ideally, 3-4 ArbACs within their area are more likely to follow this approach, i.e. a 'chicken n egg' scenario. I'm meeting various Lancashire LAs both directly and indirectly next week by virtue of delivering a BS3998 workshop / seminar at Myerscough and hence being in the area. The "Jo Public" market is difficult for us to reach directly, bar from putting an ad on ITV between Coronation Street (or GMTV as Check-a-Trade do) given it would cost thousands of pounds and hence we seek to equip the ArbACs themselves with marketing / promo stuff as they (you) are the interface. So, not an ideal answer, and I'd love to have the resources available to do more but hopefully some degree of reassurance that we are doin'summat. Can I suggest also posting in the AA ArbAC FB Group page as you may get further marketing / promotional advice / tips from other approved contractors there Thanks again fer discussin.. Paul

Come and join us Steve, I can check yer claim of no Silky scars

...but 'BYO' So, following a suggestion by a contractor in Suffolk I'm trying a different tack to meet up and 'have a chat' (yes, some time will be spent on the AAAC Scheme and AA, mainly Q&As I guess, but also on other stuff...as "YOU" like.) Just bring yer ideas along to the 'Bell Inn' - King Street - Thetford (IP24 2AZ) fer about 6pm on Tuesday 9th July. For booking please see https://www.trees.org.uk/Training-And-Events/Course-Detail?id=95B74FEB-958F-4190-9DD1-00A965A1EF20 but if you just appen to be in there come along n join us. Thanks for reading and hope to see you there Paul

The Planning Inspectorate, the body who undertake appeals. Previously done by arb inspectors, independently, but more recently by in-house staff (usually non-arbs) . This is a positive move both in terms of arb specific inspectors and more resources = reduced time for appeals...hopefully.

Dunno Mick, you always make me check myself...but I've yet to meet a climbing arb who hasn't had at least a nick from the handsaw. The pending Technical Guide 2 deals with use of tools in the tree and includes a section on handsaw use (I'll post a draft if I can put my hands on it.) Yeah, run down is quicker and hence 'less serious' cuts / injuries appen.

Good choice...Myerscough for me, I didn't travel well back then Yes, 25 handsaw to 1 chainsaw, or probably even higher...this is a guesstimate based on anecdotal evidence. I'm sure most would agree, "there or thereabouts". Going forward I wonder how many chainsaw cuts will be incurred through battery saws as opposed to petrol chainsaws...both very capable of cutting / injuring, and perhaps there'll be no difference, but my inclin is battery saws will be less, or less significant cuts / injuries maybe.

Probably summat like 25-1, or more even. Struggled to injure yerself with a 21" Sandvik, really? I must have been the 'clumsy' one of the bunch then Which caves did you originate from Mick? Paul

I'd (formally) reapply...today!

Is the original application not still live if they've not determined it, i.e. not issued refusal...which you could then appeal?

Surely this statement relates to pruning of LA owned trees given increasingly diminishing budgets and hence doing the minimum perhaps to meet their 'DoC' responsibilities.

Hi there, Sorry, but I don't recognize that condition / wording as being from the template (copy attached.) The 3rd party issue in the Ts & Cs refers to working on 'their' trees, i.e. trees outside of the enquirers property. Ts & Cs Template v6.1 (2018).doc I'm guessing the condition you cite relates to 'consequential heave' or similar (a complex matter.) Perhaps written confirmation that said condition would not apply in this instance may suffice. Cheers, Paul

Both City & Guilds AND Lantra (Awards) now offer qualification opportunities, i.e. assessments, and both use the same titles but not references (see attached.) Only Lantra offer training courses (and FISA of course for ground based stuff.) Forestry and arboricultural qualifications v0.2 27.09.13.docx

Hi all, Has anybody experienced the same? Been back to the suppliers still new, who fitted a new pump, but problem's recurred. Thanks in anticpation, Paul

Wall doesn't (yet) look unstable...poly-filla and retain a while longer Without the option to build into the footpath I can't readily see an engineering solution unfortunately. An alternative approach could be to remove the section of wall affected, above the inside ground level of course, and replace with fencing appen Shame, a nice tree...sorry Ben Paul ("chocolate fireguard")

Cheers Mick, didn't want to interrupt him ...n didn't know/realize that tbh Paul (the 'not so' teccie Teccie)

A reasonable assumption...but . C'mon Edward C. we're awaiting your answer Cheers, Paul

Think the confirmation is a separate document...hopefully Edward or Chris will be along shortly to 'confirm.' You could enquire with the LPA TO. Cheers, Paul