AA Teccie (Paul)

In my experience no one produces a Method Statement voluntarily, even though in some instances they can be very helpful. In a basic form a MS is a simple plan of work, "how, what, where, when"...simples. As Rupert quite rightly says, nothing is compulsory, inferring legally required, it down to the contractual / client requirements. Hope you find the website downloads helpful. Good luck Paul

Most is verbal acceptance, in my experience, and/or email confirmation, which is in effect 'written acceptance.' Alternatively some businesses have a 'tear off acceptance reply slip' at the bottom of the invoice or a duplicate form to sign. Regardless, remember under the 'Door-step Selling Regs', by which we are captured, customers have a minimum 7-day cooling off period if they sign 'on the day.' Cheers.. Paul

BUMP.. Hope ya's don't mind. Cheers.. Paul

Hi all, Please see ARB Approved Contractor Preparation Workshop for further details on this FREE event. Hoping to see some of you there Cheers all.. Paul

Hi all, I think Paulo (Baveresco) did quite a bit of work on this, or certainly the wider effects of tree work on the musculoskeletal frame, previously and had a couple of articles published. Trouble is I can't readily find them Cheers.. Paul

Did an assessment (in Scotland ) recently and came across this on site, seemed very good (except the name maybe ). Plant Nappy Official Website | Home Cheers.. Paul

Could try here Directory of Tree Surgeons - Arboricultural Association Good luck.. Paul

The 'ARB Show' Friday 6th - Saturday 7th June See The ARB Show - Arboricultural Association Cheers.. Paul

Sorry, rushing again. Chippers = probably weekly, as more complex machine and usually subject to 'harder' use (but again if it's low use it might be fortnightly.) Cheers.. Paul

HI 'new boy', Broadly what you refer to here is the PUWER (Provision and Use if Work Equipment Regs., 'the law relating to machinery', kinda) and LOLER (Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regs., 'the law relating specifically to lifting AND lowering equipment', kinda). PUWER is not prescriptive with regarding to maintenance and inspection frequencies, it's about doing what is 'reasonable' to maintain it in a safe condition and 'fit for use/purpose'. And, thereafter, being able to evidence such, i.e. keep a brief record/note of what you did when. So, it's very much dependent on use, i.e. for how long and for what, of the machine. I would 'suggest' (okay 'advise') chainsaws probably monthly, in terms of being in the workshop, stripped down, checked, reassembled and sharpened etc....and record (ideally.) LOLER is different as that is prescriptive with 3 levels of inspection: 1. Pre-use, by the climber (AKA 'end user'), not recorded = good practice 2. Weekly ('items subject to high wear and tear', i.e. ropes / lanyards / strops / krabs) by a 'competent person / end user' and recorded = good practice 3. 6 months (climbing kit) & 12 months (rigging kit) - 'thorough examination' (AKA 'loler inspection'), recorded (neatly), by 'LOLER inspector / competent person = LEGAL requirement. Hope this helps but see Help becoming an ARB Approved Contractor for more information and forms to record. Cheers.. Paul

Try How to book an NPTC assessment | Capel Manor College good luck paul

Sorry, late to the party...again. Regarding the initial post, I would suggest the resident(s) put pressure on the Local Authority / Highway Authority (as may not be one and the same) to act under the safety of the highway and 'users' issue, regardless of ownership. This assumes there is a road around the roundabout and it is adopted, i.e. Highway Authority maintainable. Also, I was previously advised by an LA solicitor that whilst the LA can put charges on land for certain things, such that it is reimbursed at some later date if the landowner changes, this does not include 'dangerous / obstructing trees' etc. (Just what I've been told, albeit by a 'legal eagle', so not sure it's an absolute.) Hope this helps...a little. Paul

Hopefully something to help if you look here (scroll down the page.) Help becoming an ARB Approved Contractor Cheers.. Paul

Chain BRAKE is correct, as in a device to stop motion (kinda), see page 7 of http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg317.pdf for confirmation. Cheers.. Paul PS Then go take a break..."have a ???":biggrin:

Thanks Ben See here for further details Claus Mattheck Seminars

Has it been 'refused', i.e. they've determined the application for works and said "NO", or have they declined to register it? You can only appeal if it's the former, i.e. "NO." If it's the latter, or in either case to be honest as a new application, they may be requiring to see further, more detailed, arboriculture evidence (see p.7 of attached) and if the trees have been previously 'topped' it might be worth flagging up the 'low amenity' value issue...although they're likely to respond it's collective as part of a woodland shelter belt. Hope this helps. Cheers.. Paul TPO-guidance_note-works_to_trees.pdf

Hi Ben, sorry I don't know. I'm in Head Office tomorrow so will find out and get back to you. Cheers.. Paul

Risdon Restorations - Tree Shearer on Vimeo Worth a watch for 2mins. Paul

Difficult to say just from photo's but perhaps 3m generally and 4-5m on that right hand stem. %...never was any good, maybe 30-40. Not saying the work is not compliant in terms of target pruning, it generally looks fine, but just excessive in parts. Cheers.. Paul

Hi 'R', not quite sure I've got your question right (apologies if not) but ideally, and to better accord with BS3998, not to exceed 100mm dia. (sect. 7.7.1 Note 1) and, ideally, 50mm dia. (Table 1) ...but acknowledging this is 'guidance and recommendations' and not a specification. My main point here was that the reduction to the right hand stem, as viewed, appears 'heavier' than the rest of the crown, which is quite heavy anyway. Hope this helps. Paul

As you say you had to take off more than you would have liked = "best of a bad job" (NOT to infer it's a bad job just quite 'heavy', partic. on the r'/hand stem for some reason.) As a matter of interest, or not as the case may be , if this was presented on an ArbAC assessment I'd request to see something 'lighter' BUT I would pass it as a second example as long as there's adequate justification (remember that's what BS3998 requires of us.) Hope these comments to be useful. Cheers Paul

Naaa, deffo Blackthorn...so 'Sloe Gin' instead, hic

Hmmm, can you 'layer' the hedge first maybe Think I'll leave this thread now and return to my nice, warm office. Paul

Good point, was really referring to their fruits...but shudda said that of course Cheers.. Paul

Good point, partic if TPO'd as that's what the '1APP' guidance requires (see attached....can't believe this was Sept. 2008...OMG!!!) Inevitably, well almost, if done correctly, CR will include a degree of CT. Cheers Paul 080930-Guidance for standard application form-protected.pdf