kevinjohnsonmbe

Open question - would an engagement to survey necessarily remove or preclude a persons right to request the LA consider TPO action? What could the lawyers actually do? (Unless it is a specific term of contract not to (and even then that could be viewed as unreasonable?)) Just musing.... It's obvious what the 'real world' risk could be to repeat business, but would it actually be viewed as inappropriate or unprofessional? Or perhaps the opposite? Depends whose opinion it is I guess...

Maybe, if the potential developer seeks to fell prior to submitting the planning app that would ease the conscience? Otherwise, if they are exceptional, they'll be noted as such and potentially retained / protected during the planning application?

Tricky moral question there Gary (in the circumstances mentioned...) One to ponder. My recent ones were not in that category so I didn't think of it in those terms.

Anyone can apply to the LA to have trees TPO'd. I did 2 applications last month (it says it's anonymous which can be useful sometimes.) It's all about getting a good justification case - I looked up the LA's qualifying criteria for applying a TPO and modelled the application justification on that. Here's what Cornwall council has on their web page: https://www.cornwall.gov.uk/environment-and-planning/planning/planning-advice-and-guidance/trees/#New_TPO Maybe worth looking it up for your LA, they probably have something very similar. TPO Checklistv3.pdf

Has FC changed it's procedure? Last time I did it, they wanted a 'rough' map of area marked up with compartments (I used Google screen shot), which had to be sent to them, then they produced the map and sent it back to me. A bit long winded i thought.

So it now seems we'll have to pay for registration on the BSL producer / supplier list. Received this from BSL help desk today: Dear BSL supplier, Following a competitive tender process by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS; formerly DECC), the ongoing administration of the Biomass Suppliers List (BSL) will continue to be undertaken by Gemserv, in partnership with HETAS and Woodsure. This new phase of the BSL will see some changes to how the scheme operates. The three main changes are: 1. System improvements – following feedback from users, changes will be made to the applications portal, the supplier area and the website to make the system more user friendly for suppliers. The first changes will be made in September. These include: · the introduction of a “supplier master account” to allow a company with multiple BSL supplier accounts (e.g. Producer-Trader and Trader accounts) to see all their fuels in one place; · ability to change the email address of the primary contact; · ability for Traders to be able to select other Traders’ BSL numbers in their application, in the same way that Traders can currently select the BSL numbers of Producers and Producer-Traders; · alignment of quarterly reporting periods across all fuels; and · clearer guidance on how to submit an application. 2. Introduction of supplier fees for the BSL – since its launch in April 2014, the administration of the BSL has been fully funded by BEIS (formerly DECC), with the intention that it would eventually transition to become funded by those who register on the BSL. This transition will take effect from January 2017, meaning the cost of running the BSL will be recovered from users of the scheme (i.e. the biomass suppliers and self-suppliers). The consultation is available here to gather views from BSL users on the most appropriate charging structure for all BSL registered suppliers. Please read the BSL fee overview document and the Consultation Supporting Document before submitting your consultation response. 3. Set up of a BSL Advisory Panel – an advisory panel will be introduced, comprised of various industry and self-supplier representatives, to ensure that the users of the BSL are able to input to the running of the scheme. Suppliers are invited to nominate themselves to be part of the Panel. This Panel will be encouraged to make recommendations about improvements to the scheme to BEIS, however BEIS will still have overall responsibility for all decisions regarding the scheme. For more information, please read the BSL Advisory Panel overview document and the Panel Terms of Reference and if you wish to nominate yourself, please complete the attached BSL Advisory Panel nomination form. Once the responses to the consultation have been reviewed and the nominations for the Advisory Panel have been assessed, we will provides further updates. In the meantime, if you have any questions after you have read the attached documents, please contact the BSL Helpdesk. Kind regards, Louise Biomass Suppliers List (BSL) Gemserv Limited 8 Fenchurch Place, London, EC3M 4AJ Helpdesk: +44 (0)20 7090 7769 Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.gov.uk/register-biomass-supplier Guidance Documents: IIS7 *************************************** Gemserv is an expert provider of consultancy and advisory services, predominantly in the energy, water, environmental and regulated sectors. Red Island is the information security practice and trading name of Gemserv Limited. This e-mail is intended only for the above named addressee/s. This e-mail may be confidential or legally privileged. If you have received this e-mail and you are not a named addressee, please contact the Gemserv Limited IT Administrator / 020 7090 1000 and delete this e-mail from your system. Gemserv Limited, 8 Fenchurch Place, LONDON EC3M 4AJ Tel: +44(0)20 7090 1000 Fax: +44(0)20 7090 1001, Registration Number 4419878 *************************************** <Introduction of Suppliers Fees for the BSL.pdf> <BSL Self-Funding Model Consultation supporting document v1.0.pdf> <BSL Advisory Panel.pdf> <BSL Advisory Panel ToR v1.0.pdf> <Nomination Form_v1.0.docx>

There's a good chance we'll lose the thread if it goes pear shaped and that would be a real pity. Like the guy that tipped his trailer over and shared the experience, good man for sharing, it served as a timely reminder about how things can go wrong. 👍🏻

Thanks David. Some might recognise livery, others not. But all may learn from observation / discussion. I wondered if it was chopped for legal reasons but it's just about viral on other sites.

I posted it 4 or 5 days ago but it was subject to an Arbtalk D notice! A bit like celebrity shagging, I guess the 100's of 1000's of Facebook views made it impossible to keep from the public domain? Site / public access management appears to be completely absent! If it's not subject to HSE / AA interest we might as well all just reach for our spurs and 10 gallon hats!

Same here! When time / planning allows, from Rob, emergencies only from local shop.

It's a not uncommon situation in the broader sense: Diligent, knowledgable, conscientious operator usurped by cheap, irresponsible, bodger taking scant regard for standards, bio-security, safety and regulation serving a customer whose primary interest is price. Until it becomes normal practice to expose (to the customer and appropriate agencies) illegal felling, bad practice and cowboy operations we'll never be rid of fly-by-nights.

There was a link to the vid in "bloopers" folder, it lasted about an hour then evaporated! I thought there were some interesting discussion points in the vid. >150k views on Facebook so it's not like it's subject to a D notice or something..,,

How long before your post is "disappeared?" 😎

Definitely! It's not at all uncommon to have a potential customer ask for a substantial discount off quote based on some pub-generated, perverse, supposed valuation of the timber being removed. I tend to offer simply to leave it in situ since the costs (time / resources / labour) of removal equate roughly to actual value of timber being removed. "If you think it's that valuable, I'll leave it for you to sell" usually adds the necessary element of reality! Happy days!

Great post! That shill bidding malarchy isn't confined to the potentially amateur arena of ebay either. A local (supposedly reputable) agricultural auctioneering house has been prosecuted for taking bids 'off the wall' and that reputation will always stick with them. Caveat emptor and "if it seems to good to be true, it probably is' have a ring of painful reality through this unfortunate situation.

Maybe it's a casualty of forum "interpretation / communication?" Job cost might be expected to include fell & remove if that is the spec, but maybe the job was costed below market to secure it on the expectation that some funds might be recovered by selling on the arisings - either as timber for processing or, worst case scenario, firewood? Maybe it's that part that equates to the £600 mentioned? Is that an unreasonable price? What would be reasonable?? "Arb waste" (if such a thing actually exists) it certainly isn't (that might just be my view) but I'm surprised you might think of it in those terms given the quality of your work and the ability you have to turn (what some might think of as waste) into something beautiful. Genuinely not wishing to seem confrontational, but isn't better to at least try and find a second user that has the talent / time to change arb arisings into saleable product? The tree house on your website is sensational! I'm now determined to find and save a large hollow stem and try something similar!

I guess they would benefit from - if you don't like the trees, don't buy the house - sort of situation. Does that sign say "Do not Climb?" Not sure my dog would approve of that!

And planning departments? Despite existing protections, and regardless of the obvious majesty of tree in your pics, I'd bet, at some point, "someone" is going to have a real or perceived issue with it and, human nature being what it is, the tree will undoubtedly lose. Surely a lack of foresight allowing a build so close to such a tree? If the tree was considered important enough to warrant retention, surely it would have been better to push the building line back far enough to allow for the decades / centuries of tree growth? Maybe in a perfect world....

An alternative to AGA / Rayburn, is the Heritage Range, designed, manufactured, supplied & fit by http://www.heatingsouthwest.co.uk/cookers-liskeard-cornwall.php. Well worth a look / talk to Jim before committing to the better known brands above. 👍🏻

Ben Shirley (Liskeard) specialises in scoping and recommending integrated systems. He tends not to supply / fit (so that he can maintain a credible distance from the potential for compromise by recommending specific kit he will supply and fit.) Really nice guy, might be worth giving him a call? Unlike the usual (BS) sales patter, he will want to discuss lifestyle and usage / demand pattens (current and future) in order to arrive at a 'proper' assessment of what's best for your circumstances. We're on pellets & solar thermal heavily augmented by 4x log burning stoves (unfortunately not back boiler style but cost of re-plumbing didn't stack up for us.) I didn't meet Ben until after we'd done all our work, wish I'd known him before! Domestic RHI was a disappointment (delay and reduction in term & level) but was only ever the 'cherry on top' rather than the reason for our installation. http://www.cat.org.uk/membersonly/conference%202008/Ben%20Shirley.pdf

Artistry! I saw some really nice hedges on the Staffordshire moorland a while back whilst visiting the in-laws. Going to make a special effort to look up and visit some Devon / Cornwall comp's this year.

Maybe it points towards a more pan-departmental systemic failure perhaps? As always, there's more we can't know than that which we might assume based on a snap-shot. Maybe it's a consequence of the absence of a safety / environmental awareness culture which has to be driven from the top down as much as the irresponsible actions of an individual. Just guessing, but surely the LA's legal dept would have looked at apportioning blame on the individual (it that's where it properly sat) rather than copping for the blame & fine? Hopefully, as a consequence, somebody in the tree team is talking to someone in the highways team to ask, WTF were you thinking! 😳

London borough council fined for safety failings | Media centre - HSE

Apologies all, Beau, now my message box is full & I can't seem to delete from iPhone whilst away from laptop. Message: 👍🏻👍🏻 can't remember what I previously wrote now! I think that message has been lost in cyber-limbo! Thanks for sharing yr insight. It's a stumbling block if there's no market / profit available. Perhaps it's a SW thing? Folks seem to be time rich / money poor! I certainly make my own, but only for personal consumption! Looking at the prices in garages / farm shops, somebody must be making a fair mark-up. Maybe it's only viable on a very large scale with broad distribution. Pains me to think a local network with free source materiel wouldn't be viable but I'm just not sure it's worth the effort. 😟