Gary Prentice

I think the estate will be pre 1990, but have no idea when the owner bought it. From what I've been informed, the original builders plans show this parcel outside the estate and the councils plans don't extend to the clients boundary. The land is useless to everyone, being landlocked, apart from a neighboring property. Its roughly triangular, with two fencelines (Clients and Neighbours) meeting at right angles. Third side is unfenced but borders onto a large grass verge with council owned trees. I wish the council had just said they had maintained it, planted trees on it, for long enough to claim it. Then sold it to him.

Sorry, I got a bit sidetracked on the roots section of the website, but didn't particularly think that was what you were proposing. I'm tempted to put forward that idea of just claiming the land, but hold off on any tree work for a year or two.

I'm not sure when the 201 section was applied. Thanks for posting the section on the implementation. I would assume that in the T&C Act(s) itself there must be something to cover unknown title though, as Treequip is saying. I'll check with planning.

Correct. Although the situation is more difficult, in that there is no-one to sue to abate the nuisance/trespass. I'm wondering what then occurs in the future, when the tree becomes diseased/decayed. This situation can't be that uncommon, but I'm unaware of any legal precedent on what can be done.

Planning served the neighbour, our client, as the owner of the land. In the belief that he had purchased the land from themselves. They seem to think the order is invalid, in that it wasn't served correctly. I'm meeting planning & the TO thursday on a number of other sites, so I'll suggest they re-issue it.

There is, but the tree's only a nuisance cos it's lifting the fence. They wouldn't get involved. Plannings cocked up in the wording " remove offending roots" rather gives the client cart Blanche to set to with his act. Although there is the normal condition of works in compliance to BS3998. Doubt if he has a copy of that as bed time reading.

I'm sure you're right Andy, my blue books at work so I'll refresh my memory tomorrow. Do you think the order is valid as it stands today though?

Client has never had the use of this land, nor fenced it etc. After having a quick look at the garden law site I wouldn't be that happy to promote it. If the roots were severed, legally or not (bearing in mind the consent already given) who is liable when the tree falls into the neighbours garden or onto his conservatory? I don,t think it can be as simple as you can just cut invading roots, whether the tree dies or not( as garden law appears to claim)

:confused1::confused1:

I don't know how that works Andy, in that I believed that they had to serve the order - recorded delivery etc. Planning officer agreed that, at this moment in time, the order has been served on the wrong person, so may not be valid. Anyway, its a bit immaterial, in that our client can't get agreement off of the land/tree owner to do anything, with or without LPA consent.

This is a little complicated, so please bear with me. We have a client who has consent to prune a TPO'd tree. When I arrived in his garden the tree is over the fence. The first line of the consent reads roughly " remove offending roots". Now this tree is immediately abbutting the boundary fence and two six inch buttress roots are the offending items. The gravel board is raised 4-5 above soil level. Lengthy conversation ensues about stability and liability. We can't do that no matter what the consent says. The pruning part of schedule still looks okay to quote. "Who owns the tree?" "No one!" Turns out the client thought the local council owned this small patch of land, approached them to purchase it, to extend his garden. The planning department got wind of it and served an order. (in the belief that he had purchased it) But the council don't actually own. Our client has paid someone to search the land registery. The land owned by the original builder didn't include it, the councils land falls short, as does that of a neighbouring property. Because our client isn't the actual owner, he can't be served and the LPA agree they're in error. If the client could buy the land, he can change fencelines and prune the tree. As it seems to stand, the LPA can't protect the tree and the client can't do anything because he doesn't own it, or ascertain who does. Advise please, cos its giving me a headache:confused1:

Contact the department head and ask for an explanation, if you can prove it.

This would be a good opportunity to try out one of the lateral flow field kits. It would be interesting to test yoursef and then confirm the result with the FC's.

To quantify my earlier post and still to be in agreement with Hama's. If there is an assessment of a weak structure, either a weak union, with included bark between co-dom' stems, or an over-extended limb etc and a decision is made to install cables I'd definitely instal at the earliest opportunity. (with a scheduled adjustment visit once in leaf) This morning every tree in sight was loaded with snow and we've all seen failures due to that. Section 10.2 of BS3998:2010 • commitment and availability of resources to undertake the required continuing maintenance of the restraint or support system; My personal opinion would be that if a structural weakness has been identified, remediation works are required now. I think we'd be on a very sticky wicket if failure occured while we were waiting for the leaves to come out.

I've done both previously. Surely though, if there's a requirement for bracing the answer would be as soon as possible? Just allow enough slack for when in leaf. A quick scan of BS3998:2010 doesn't specify a particular period for installation.

Fungal strategies of wood decay in trees ...... Schwarze and Mattheck

They may be frowned upon, but theres an awful lot out there. I'm dealing with one covering 9 acres that was made in the early seventies. Talks with TO's and LPA's reveal that there's insufficient funding to update them. I hypothetically disagree that every tree/all trees is not a clear enough definition. There can't be any doubt, in the planning department, if every tree is to be felled. All is all, every single one.... I'm speaking to our Planning Officer about this anyway, just as a hypothetical teaser. Its an interesting thread.

I was in Cambridge in the late eighties. Many trees had been previously successfully braced, using the old invasive techniques. We found many trees with cables had uprooted. But significantly with partial failures, cables held the failed limbs and stems up. If the client is keen to retain the tree, I'd go ahead. It may not even need further reduction but you'd have to be the judge of that. I'd maybe give it a good mulch as well, in that more vigour may encourage woundwood to start to close the split with complete annual rings. (which is the long term objective)

If a Local Authority can create an Area Order with out identifying every trees position and species, can they reject a 211 notice, supplied with an O.S plan of the entire CA and the details "every tree over 75mm dbh". This would surely set a legal precedent if the applicant either appealled to the courts or to the secretary of state. If the councils refusal to accept the notice was upheld, every area order TPO could be brought into question.

NOTE Appropriate restraint may be provided by one of the following: a) flexible restraint (10.4) – the installation of a flexible material, either synthetic fibre ropes or steel cables, to reduce dynamic loading on potentially weak structures and thereby to restrain excessive movement. This operation is normally accompanied by pruning to reduce the loading on weak structures in the tree (see Clause 7); b) rigid bracing (10.5) – the installation of solid rods or bolts into the tree to limit movement or to help support a weak structure; 10.5 Rigid bracing COMMENTARY ON 10.5 A rigid brace involves the use of bespoke steel components inserted into a tree to prevent the independent movement of adjacent parts of the tree that form a weak structure. This helps to relieve stress on the weak structure, as in the case of a tight fork with included bark, or a split along the axis of a stem or branch (10.5.1). Rigid bracing may also be used to prevent movement of branches where they rub together (10.5.2) or to brace the walls of a cavity (10.5.3). Parts of a tree that contain decayed wood are often unsuitable for bracing together using a rigid system, since the bracing rods are likely to pull out if the decay spreads into the sound wood in which the rods have been secured From BS3998:2010 I can't assess enough from the photo to offer any opinion. From experience though, I'd also consider the following points. We used rigid braces in these situations, coupled with a cable 2/3 higher in the canopy to limit the stress at the threaded rod. I've no idea how this species compartmentalizes decay. If it's poor, the rod may quickly, in tree terms become inaffective. I did observe that most of the trees that had been "rodded" survived the storm in the late eighties, in that the whole tree failed rather than just stem failure occuring. Shigo did a lot of work on these techniques, so it's well worth researching. The newer boa non-invasive cables seem to be adequate, but again do more research. At the end of the day, in the event of a failure, its your neck on the block. There's lots of aspects to consider and decisions that you need to make. Read everything you can find on the subject. Good luck.

Did you read the first post? To disguise the intention to fell a tree that the LA would tpo, what would happen if you notified to fell every tree on the CA Council would have to make an area order, lettering every address within six weeks!

And then do every CA in the borough.

Is that the normal protocol? Serve the six month temp. order, create the CA within the six month period and then not bother to confirm the Area Order. Just interested because I've never read anything about how CA's are actually created. It seems like an awful lot of work, if you have to notify every individual householder. Going back to the original hypothesis, I can't see any alternative other than to create an Area TPO. The secretary of state has stated that an area order should be a short term solution and individual orders should be made, within a reasonable period, of those trees worthy of protection. Some Area Orders locally are thirty or forty years old, so identification of trees present at the time of the order becomes an issue. There's insufficient resources available to update all the old ones.

Thanks Alex, that's a very clear and concise explanation. Skyhuck, the definitions I searched shows no real difference between FL and subbie. Pulling up a chair now to watch Andy and Matt discuss......

So what's the difference between a subbie and freelance?