Hi All,
We have some land which borders a housing development (built about 60 years ago). Along the boundary (on our side) is a line of mature trees which have been there for 180+ years.
We get the trees regularly inspected by tree surgeons, and occasionally have some taken out. Last year one of the large beeches fell over and flattened a neighbour’s garden shed. Legally I don’t think we were liable because the beech had shown no signs of disease. However, as a gesture of good will, we did pay to have the tree removed.
The trees are at the bottom of a slope, and the houses are further down, so the only way we could remove the fallen tree was by hiring a crane to lift it over the houses. This was obviously an expensive exercise, costing us over £10k.
After this incident we got in tree surgeons to remove roughly half of the 30-odd trees – basically any that showed the slightest sign of vulnerability. (Again, this was at vast expense!) As a tree lover, I find this pretty devastating. The once magnificent swathe of trees is now reduced to a sorry shadow of its former self.
Even after all we have done, we still have a neighbour complaining to us of anxiety because they are afraid the tree next to their plot presents a risk to their lives and property. I can understand that, but haven’t we done enough? Is it really our problem? The trees were there long before the houses!
As I understand it, the law says we are only liable if a tree falls which was known to be unsafe, e.g. “damaged or diseased”. What if the trees are perfectly healthy but on a slope – if one does fall there’s only one way it’ll go: downhill towards the houses.
Regards,
Mafegi
p.s. We are in Northern Ireland.