MarkII

I have and unfortunately they are as useful as my core insurer, don't want to know until civil action taken against me. Yeah they have completed ground core samples, the garage foundations are only 0.6m and found no roots beyond 1.6m, the main house core slightly further away had foundations to 1.1m and no roots beyond 2.1m, all soft to firm silty clay. Feels like tree is easy target though unlikely to resolve what is an issue with insufficient foundations on a fluctuating clay base

Thanks for all the comments/thoughts, including the light hearted one which as an adult, I took in jest 😉 I am on very good terms with my neighbour, lovely elderly lady. She's rightly concerned and we both want her house issues rectified. Latter part of 2022 had the highest rate of subsidence claims in the UK since 2006 so whilst the tree clearly takes moisture, the drought was the primary cause, arguably the movement would have occurred anyway. Removing the tree will not resolve the issue and could cause more issues! My own insurers don't want to get involved until all the work is completed and my neighbours insurers attempt a recovery. In my mind that is too late, if I remove the tree then that could be interpreted as an acceptance of liability, hence why I am looking into establishing it as a contributor not the root cause (excuse the pun) and get them to accept the liability/repair her house rather than elongate the while situation with tree removal, further monitoring for god knows how long, then deal with heave and underpinning anyway. There has been 11 months of movement monitoring with all movement on the opposite side of the property where the slope goes away from the house, its dropped then risen as the recent wet weather has soaked the clay. Its normally very wet here and the property has a retaining wall on the other side down the slope and also another similar age large beech Though not as close. I will engage with the TO and see what protection the existing TPO provides, last resort is the local village community and their pitchforks.....

Neighbours house built in the 1970's, the attached garage is within a couple of metres of the tree, which would have been over 100 years old when the house was built. Built on clay sloping away from the tree and with 6ft retaining walls other side of the property and another large Beech tree on that side. No damage or subsidence occurred until suffering cracking during last 6 months of 2022. (ABI has identified 2022 as the worst subsidence claims issue UK wide since 2006 - due to drought) My neighbours claims management company appointed structural engineers and an arborist to assess the situation. The cracking in the house appears to be in the middle of the house which is away from my tree and from the movement assessment, the main movement seems to be at the opposite end of the property with next to no movement right next to the tree. The first course of action is to insist on the tree's removal with an aggressive couple of letters. The engineer reports suggest that the tree 'contributes' to the issue, not suggesting it is the main cause however the arborist states the tree as the main cause. Also mentioned by the engineer is that the house has insufficient foundations and once the tree removed, will require further monitoring and probably underpinning anyway. Does anyone experienced any similar situations and can offer any advice/guidance i.e. how fast do Beech's grow? Are there any alternatives to removing/can it be chopped back bit to reduce water consumption without losing it's stature? If it is removed, is it likely to cause more issues as it's 160 year old root base declines? (I am estimating it's age based on Mitchells rule with a girth of 330cm) We're in an AONB, conservation areas and the tree has a TPO on it, in addition to being widely loved by the community (applied to have it dead-wooded and the parish council turned up at my door!) and is visible throughout the valley when in leaf. Just feels like the insurer is trying to offload the liability onto my insurance and remove this grand old copper Beech to try to avoid paying for fixing the insufficient foundations, any advice or guidance would be gratefully received! Pics show the tree in question, the attached double garage of the neighbours on the right Many thanks Mark