kevinjohnsonmbe

Just to clarify, I like Tarzans approach, I'm not so keen on OPs approach! Probably would have been better to discuss the perceived short comings with the individual concerned rather than a public execution

Respect is a 2 way street! If I were the 'boy' reading these views from my boss I'd be looking elsewhere...

That'd be a treat for the world....

Many thanks for the "heads-up" on Mynors, Amazon order Friday arrived Monday just in time for a quick cram read before the meeting with the neighbour this morning. I felt well briefed and the meeting went very well. I'll get on the laptop tomorrow and post some pics and detail. Just got to see the vicar now to see how he would feel about some limbs being lowered into the cemetery! It won't be a "stopper" if he's not keen but could speed the job along if he's happy.

That's just my view ):0) The insurance company said "bullx" anyway! Farmer can't be bothered to pursue it any further ):0(

An interesting observation (and I appreciate you're only able to comment on the detail I provided, which is significantly abridged version of the recordable detail), however, frequency of use is pretty irrelevant, a farm is a place of work, ergo, H&SaW does apply (not in the case of the bullock, but in the case of the farmer who could just as easily have been going about his lawful business on his land.) The hazard existed, the fact that it impacted the bullock rather than the farmer is a matter of coincidence.

I was engaged to report on tree that had fallen from the boundary hedge (Cornish hedge) into the neighbouring farmers field. The tree struck a bullock causing a broken leg which resulted in the beast being destroyed. The farmer suffering loss required a tree report for insurance claim against the neighbouring farmer (although they remain on good neighbourly terms.) I recorded all the relevant detail including extensive, visible decay at the base of the tree (to such an extent that ANY person seeing such decay would reasonably be expected to anticipate the hazardous nature of the tree - and since the farmer was drawing down stewardship funding, and regularly managing the hedgerow, should have observed and taken measures to ameliorate the hazard). Having failed to take action on the hazard, and the subsequent failure and the loss/damage incurred it should have been taken as a breach of H&SaW and Occupiers Liability Act. Guess what, insurance (NFU) refused to accept the claim.

Thanks all for the overwhelming responses (some notably I was very much hoping to hear from having read previous sage counsel on other subjects!) I'll re-read all responses tomorrow AM and expand / reply to each individually. Next step is meeting with the neighbour, we'll see how that pans out and I'll précis outcome when appropriate.

Absolutely agree and that's what I told the homeowner they need to do 2 weeks ago. However, neither the estate agent nor the solicitor seem able/willing to clarify (I'll leave opinions of those 2 professional groups out for the time being.) I also told the homeowner that if neither the estate agent nor the solicitor would or could define the boundary (a ludicrous situation - how can they offer for sale something that is not defined?) then I could take a scale from LR drawing and pace the garden - a bit rudimentary but hey, I'm an arborist not a £140/hr solicitor or a 2.5% commission estate agent!

Just had a look on Amazon - £123 for Mynors book, would you say you use it a lot BT? I can have a copy by Saturday with express delivery, I know it'll come in handy for this one and I suspect it'll be something I'll use time & again!

Thanks guys, it's a 2 part problem really. Firstly, nobody seems able to accurately define the boundary and therefore make an informed decision on "ownership or joint ownership" which might provide a way ahead. Second, if we can't define ownership (or reach a mutual agreement) cutting back to a line which is well within the smaller garden would be a sound option except that to do so would greatly increase the risk of the tree failing, in part or completely, into the opposite garden.

Sky, I get the early impression (brief phone call) that they will oppose the proposed work (meeting next week), sharing the cost is a pretty slim chance but it's the other neighbour that has the safety concern and is having bad feedback from viewings. I feel for them really, can't sell and move because of the tree, if they stay they're still deeply troubled by the size and prominence of the tree. Rock & hard place!

Whoops, pressed send too soon! I don't get a warm feeling that they'd agree to a disclaimer, the other option is to inform them of the intention to reduce and potential for subsequent destabilisation which they should seek to assess through professional advice. That's the legal bit I've been looking at. In that way they are informed and have the option to take avoiding action if they choose to do so. If they choose not to, it may be seen that they ignored a potential hazard and therefore assume some liability.

Marc, The neighbour in the grand detached house with extensive gardens is not at all concerned about the potential hazard the tree poses to them(although they ought to be looking at the lateral growth and summer house below.) A meeting is booked to discuss the issues with the owners of the large house but early indications are that they may be reluctant. to agree to any reduction / removal

Sorry Tarzan, I think that's a regional dialogue confusion... When I refer to a 'hedge', in this instance, it's a stone and earth bank (wall if you like) upon which the tree grows. "...In Cornwall, a hedge is generally a built structure or bank with or without a stone facing. Frequently, these are topped with woody trees, plants and shrubs and, sometimes but not always, form hedgerows. They have defined our landscape for centuries and today provide a distinct local identity quite different from other areas of the country where hedgerows are more common..."

Thanks all for PMs! Will be in touch.

Anyone come cross a situation like this before? Sorry if it’s a big long winded but I’m hoping to paint as full a picture as possible. Mature Ash growing in an elevated position on a former agricultural boundary hedge (soil and granite.) Previously either side of the boundary hedge would have been agricultural, through the 60’s and 70’s both sides were developed for housing. The early development was rather exclusive large detached houses with big gardens on the one side, shortly followed by rather less grand semi-detached estate style hosing with considerably smaller gardens on the other side of the boundary. Without getting into the debate over ‘which came first, the house or the tree’ and the moral / arboricultural / ecological arguments for retaining the tree which will send us into ever decreasing circles, the tree is now too large for the environment in which it grows. Personally, I see it as a shortcoming in the planning consideration where trees are ordered to be retained in former agricultural boundaries which are now residential. Had it remained an agricultural boundary the entire length of the hedge would have been subject to thinning / reduction by the farmer and probably would never have grown to it’s current girth which is a significant issue for the homeowner. So, it’s a small garden semi-detached house owned by an elderly couple attempting to sell and move closer to family. Previously, they have managed to agree with the neighbour that an arb team crown clean and remove 1 leader leaning well into their garden. That was some years ago and, as you’d expect, the regrowth is now almost touching the house again. The house is on the market, 3 previous viewings have resulted in the prospective purchaser expressing concern over the tree. The neighbour in the grand detached house with extensive gardens is not at all concerned (although they ought to be looking at the lateral growth and summer house below.) The estate agent and solicitor acting for the vendor, it would seem (lazy??) are unable to define exactly where the boundary is – centre line of the hedge, inside face or outside face. Given that if it’s not clearly defined, it would be reasonable to assume it is the centre line, and if that is true, then each party has joint ownership of the tree (if it grows on the centre line.) In this case, the majority (loosely 2/3) of the tree grows to the side of the hedge off the centre line towards the smaller house whose owners want to reduce / remove. A meeting is booked to discuss the issues with the owners of the large house but early indications are that they may be reluctant. My initial thoughts: If unable to clearly identify the line of boundary, the homeowner wanting to reduce / remove can legitimately do so to a vertical line above (for arguments sake) the inside face of the stone bank. However, to do so will inevitably destabilise the tree to a dangerous extent and may lead to later collapse or limb failure leading to damage in the other neighbours garden for which it might be argued, the instigator of the reduction has liability. So the common law right to remove back to your boundary is well established, but when doing so leads to consequential failure where does that leave us? It seems a bit murky in law. If it can be established that the centre line of the hedge is the boundary, the homeowner with 2/3 of the tree inside their boundary would be the owner of the tree. I have a plan in mind, appreciate any input from out there in Arbworld.

I'm in the market for 90m2 (poss x2 if I do upstairs & down) of floor boards. It's not a big rush, lead time could go out as far as a year or more if necessary. Conversely, if anyone has a pile they want to shift quickly, I can take early and keep laid up indoors to finish their seasoning. I'm just floating this opportunity out there to see if anyone has some timber they're looking to sell. If not, I'm looking at a Lucas myself and will process as the trees become available. I'm SE Cornwall based but finding a transport solution won't be a show stopper if the boards are good. If anyone has any leads I'd be much obliged, reply or PM as you prefer.

So Northern (nails!), he wants the planks for his sandwiches!!

You were hard done by Jim! The Senior Service were delivering FREE heli-logging courses on the 18th hole at CULDROSE. Only snag was, it was over consecutive weekends but that was OK because "working" over the weekend qualified us for 4 days off during the week! It was all going well until the smoke from the BBQ reduced the viz for flying so the course was extended (more mid week time off!) the options for no fly time was either surfing at Perranporth followed by a Jack Johnson gig at the watering hole (free bar) or a jello tag wrestling demonstration by a touring Swedish girls volleyball team. I miss the tough times!!

All good advice so far! One thing Id add though, get a carbon monoxide detector fitted fella, +\- £20, easy instal, might just save your health/life!

Like!!!

Brilliant! Not silver or QE, but made me larf like a Lord!!

Good thread!

Beauty!