AA Teccie (Paul)

Hi there, sorry for the delay in responding. Glad you posted back again as this has been playing on my mind a bit. Firstly, and my comments were a little "off the cuff" as I mentioned, but I guess there's no harm in posing the "conflict of interest" question to your own businesses practice where you both consult and contract. Obviously thereafter there is a range of possible solutions ranging from undertaking them both and being bound by your own, and/or reinforced by ICF/ISA/AA, code of professional conduct / ethics to not doing them and directing clients elsewhere. In many respects "each to their own" but being clear on what your "own" is, is important (does that make sense? ) I feel. Secondly, obviously the schemes themselves address differing aspects of tree management and hence there is natural separation between the two activities which, in part, avoids the issue. I say that as many 'ARB Approved Contractors' do consult, to a greater or lesser extent, but not many, if any (that I am aware of) AA Registered Consultants actually contract...at least not directly. In both instances they are bound by the Association's Code of Ethics and Code of Professional Conduct, and the respective "rules / Ts & Cs of the schemes. Hence there is no specific 'policy' as such. Hoping this helps to clarify things, and qualified my "off the cuff-ness" Cheers.. Paul

ARB Approved Whilst it certainly is to a very good standard, no argument, and involving a species that lends itself to nice reductions, why is it that the height is often reduced more than the spread, or at least appears to be? Coz it's easier, coz the clients wants it, coz that's the right thing to do? I see this quite often and have never really understood why. Thoughts? Cheers.. Paul

CPD is an interesting thing. One of my main sources is ARBTALK and the stuff that's disseminated on here, in no small part thanks to yourself David, and others of course. Trouble is it's "informal" and people probably wouldn't think to record it in the same way they would a specific seminar / workshop / conference / show etc. BUT don't overlook this opportunity and, I guess, you would need to just capture "what" you've learned (very briefly.) Other than that I'm very lucky to be in a position which means I attend many events and glean much information...often combined with 'other duties'. Good to get people thinking about the subject. Cheers.. Paul

Perhaps I was pre-empting what Eugene might ask next in terms of possible conflicts of interest. To be honest it was a little "off the cuff" with no underlying concern nor intention, As you say, and many others have since, many do both roles and are completely open, honest and professional. Cheers.. Paul

Yep, lots. Which begs the potential 'conflict of interest' scenario and how impartiality is achieved. Some business offer consultancy under a different company to give at least some separation. Some business 'advise' clients to get 3 quotes based on their consultancy recommendations but hope to include their contracting arm within that. Cheers.. Paul

Hi there, credit to you for posting and looking to improve This reduction wouldn't accord with BS3998 as the general principle of not removing more than 1/3rd of 'foliage bearing material' appears to have been exceeded. Further, as others have said, ideally the secondary growth you prune back to should be at least 1/3rd dia. of the branch you're cutting. Overall it appears a little hard in places and because no suitable growth points are present, and Sycamore can be challenging to reduce anyway, some of the cuts are 'inter-nodal', i.e. between nodes/buds/shoots, which is akin to lopping (NOT that I would call this lopping but just to be aware.) Lastly, of course we didn't see the spec, in terms of reduction by how much, so it may be spot on! Hoping the above to be of help and good luck with the next one. Cheers.. Paul

Hi Steph, glad u found the day useful and look forward to your application in due course...good stuff! don't hesitate to contact me if you need any further guidance/assistance. Thanks for taking the trouble to post. best regards paul

Hi, it's at the Memorial Hall (i think) n 9.30 meet for 10am start. if you can email [email protected] she'll book you on and send joining instructions nearer the time with full details (and she'll prepare you a nice certificate for your CPD record, an advantage of actually booking on the workshop.) Thanks for your interest n look forward to seeing you there. Cheers.. Paul

Hi Tony, the TO is deemed to be a professional who is well placed to recommend you based on your work quality, an important prerequisite for approval. plus we've triedvto position the scheme to suit the local authority sector requirements, hence the LA connection. Regards...and goodnight PAUL

"No more"...latest HSE indg 317 & AFAG (FISA) 301 put it down to site / task risk assmt. Hence, generally, work gloves are fine. cheers PAUL

How'd you know if u don't come along n find out more. N if you know yiu don't meet the criteria, and you understand where/what, then ur already half way there...simples jokin apart do come along n have a look/listen. No obligation, no commitment...n it's free. Cheers.. paul

That's a pity. Be sure to come n join us if things change for you. cheers Paul

Insurance related posts often crop up on forum, understandably. Hence I would like to offer a couple of observations, if I may: PL = public liability (optional) and EL = employers liability (compulsory, if you employ / directly engage people...probably) 1. Cheapest doesn't = best (an obvious statement but a good start point.) 2. Are the quotes "like for like"? (easy to say but difficult to sometimes to compare...try) 3. Check the 'conditions / exclusions / endorsements', or whatever they choose to call them (in other words their opportunities not to 'pay-up' in event of an incident / accident) BE VERY CAREFUL HERE in relation to tree heights and removals in proximity to highways / structures. 4. Ask others opinions (in particular in the event of a claim, and THANK YOU 'ARBTALK' for an easy opportunity to do so) Lastly if you are self-employed person undertaking works for others ensure you are covered under their EL insurance under your terms / contract of engagement and/OR have very good personal accident cover (see attached.) Cheers all.. Paul Paralysed tree surgeon loses claim against National Trust.docx

Hi Steve, as I'm sure others have already said ("smell the coffee Paul!") FSB annual membership costs about £250 per year and they will help with recovering small value debts. Several ArbACs are members and talk very highly of it. Good luck n £200 is a lot of money AND it's the principle behind it Cheers.. Paul

Hey Rob...sorry should have said = FoC (but you have to bring yer own baggin) Hope that's oaky with you. Cheers.. Paul PS Sorry, don't know what I've done here, numpty 'Teccie' strikes again.

"Miss it = miss out!":lol: Okay, I don't do sales but "good effort" yeah?! So who's, gonna be joining me at Wrexham? REMEMBER if you're a 'small' business, i.e. fewer than 5 employees, and you come along with a nomination from a LA Tree Officer (see attached) you get the chance of a FREE assessment (saving £495 +VAT) or one of two 'half-pricers' (saving £247.50) Hoping to see you there Thanks all.. Paul Free_Assessment_Nom_Form-1213-web.pdf

Your only opportunity to prevent the TPO form being confirmed and made permanent is to 'object'. You should have a min. 28 days from the date you were notified, or the date on the Reg. 5 notice (see attached.) The primary reason for placing a TPO is 'amenity' value, i.e. visual impact, which can be present or future. Hence if the tree isn't clearly visible from a public place, i.e. street, then grounds for objection could be made. In terms of expediency, the Council have already determined this hence the TPO. Regards.. Paul TPO - objections.docx

Hi there, in addition to Julian's excellent explanatory post above I would suggest taking a look at the attached docs. Ideally I would recommend you should have at least the 'operatives' training in place if you are placing cones and signs and / or maintaining them through the working day (1 day course and training, rather than licensing, should be adequate.) Cheers.. Paul New Red book 2014.pdf NRSWA.docx

Hi, St Johns, unless specifically catering for the tree surgery / arb sector, would meet the minimum requirements for compliance. HSE (strongly) recommend FA training should be relevant to your industry, hence the comments about ArbAid and ABC who deliver this so it's much better really. If you can access a course that is industry specific and includes the +F (plus Forestry, inc. arb) suffix it may be beneficial as certain clients prefer it or insist on it (Forestry Commission.) Hope this helps. Paul

Hi James, hope you're well. There's clearly some overlap here and making recommendations based on the clients desires and the tree condition and form etc. is part n parcel of contracting (and usually covered in PL insurance I believe.) I guess I'm referring to responses / requests for specific tree safety reports etc., as Steve said "when you put it in writing." I'm not seeking to provoke here, perhaps a tad naïve I guess, just urging caution and hoping to make people think twice about doing stuff they may not be best placed to. Cheers.. Paul

Hi all, hope you're well. Prompted by noting several posts over the past few months where Tree Surgery businesses, as detailed in their signature strips, are proposing tree consultancy / reports etc. I felt compelled to post my concerns. PLEASE, please, be sure before you embark on any tree reports / written advice / consultancy etc. that you are adequately qualified, suitably competent and appropriately insured (Professional Indemnity not Public Liability.) If you aren't, and particularly if it's a tree safety issue, or indeed an issue with legal implications, you could come unstuck ...despite your best intentions. I guess I'm saying that knowing the extent of your knowledge and expertise, and not straying beyond this, is about being professional. Equally, I would similarly advise Tree Consultancy businesses to think very carefully about doing tree surgery works...not quite the same though I know. Thanks all.. Paul

Not at all, "credit where credit's due", wish we saw more of this sort of quality pruning but increasingly customers are looking for "more" for their money n hence we see this increasingly less frequently. Thanks for posting. Paul

I'll second that ...when you presenting for ARB Approved jokin apart, great job! Cheers.. Paul

Just a quickie here. REMEMBER AFAG 401 Tree Climbing Ops recommends Type C's in the tree (unless very hot weather and risk assessment dictates Type A's.) Hence, potentially, an insurance issue if a back of leg cut occurs (not that I'm aware of many) and wearing Type A's. Take care out there. Paul