STRUCTURAL DAMAGE- Council Oak TREE ROOTS damaging our Conserventry

keystone

Danny_G wrote: »

How old? 15 years +

2+ Metre Foundations were dug. (im sure more even) but the cracks are still appearing.

So the conservatory is well younger than the tree then? Or are you answering how old the tree is?

Safe distance for PLANTING an oak tree is as short as 18 metres by one source and 30 by another. So I remain of the view that building your conservatory only 2/3 metres from a well established tree is seriously asking for trouble irrespective of how big the foundations were. I don't think you'll get much joy out of the Council TBH. Sorry to be blunt.

Cheers

Danny_G

keystone wrote: »

So the conservatory is well younger than the tree then? Or are you answering how old the tree is?

Safe distance for PLANTING an oak tree is as short as 18 metres by one source and 30 by another. So I remain of the view that building your conservatory only 2/3 metres from a well established tree is seriously asking for trouble irrespective of how big the foundations were. I don't think you'll get much joy out of the Council TBH. Sorry to be blunt.

Cheers

Yes, the conserventry was build 6 years ago, so it is younger.

The tree was there first

keystone

So the tree is only 15 years old? In which case its hardly a "giant" yet. How old is the house? If its more than 15 years old then you may have a case against the council for planting the tree so close to your house in the first instance but as the conservatory was built when the tree was already 9 years old they've probably got some serious wriggle room on their side.

I think Post #10 is most germane.

Cheers

Danny_G

keystone wrote: »

So the tree is only 15 years old? In which case its hardly a "giant" yet. How old is the house? If its more than 15 years old then you may have a case against the council for planting the tree so close to your house in the first instance but as the conservatory was built when the tree was already 9 years old they've probably got some serious wriggle room on their side.

I think Post #10 is most germane.

Cheers

15-25 years (I am just assuming)

It was Huge (the same size as it is now) when the conserventry was build

iamcornholio

It matters not the age of the tree or which was there first. If a tree causes damage then the owners are responsible for the damage.

You would make a claim, in writing, to the council and allege that their tree is causing you damage and loss. They will investigate.

If they agree that the tree is causing the damage, then they are obligated to deal with it. It may mean removal or pollarding, and then they will need to compensate for the damage. There may be alternatives.

If you want to, you can cut all the roots up to your boundary, and then the onus will be on the council to deal with any stability issues.

Bare in mind that removing large trees in one go can cause more damage when the ground swells up as it rehydrates.

The council may deny liability for the damage, in which case the onus is on you to prove that the tree is causing damage - in which case you would need to engage a suitably experienced person for expert comment and ground analysis

If you do get a structural engineer who does free checks, then you should also have a go on the lottery as your luck will be in

phill99

Danny_G wrote: »

15-25 years (I am just assuming)

It was Huge (the same size as it is now) when the conserventry was build

Let mne get this right: So you built the conservatory AFTER the tree was planted? There was a great big oak tree near your property and you built an extension and now YOU want the council to compensate you because YOU think their tree (that has been there a lot longer than your conservatory), has caused damage?

Don't take the pi$$.

keystone

How tall then? It doesn't really matter though as the conservatory was still built within 6 - 10 feet of it and thats far, far too close! The time for discussion / action with the council about the tree was prior to build IMHO.

Now if the foundations had been approved / signed off by a BCO (ie council employee) that could be a whole different ball of wax.

Cheers

keystone

iamcornholio wrote: »

It matters not the age of the tree or which was there first. If a tree causes damage then the owners are responsible for the damage.

So if I deliberately build a structure within a matter of feet of an established tree without taking consideration of the existence of that tree and its roots in the design of the structure and the structure subsequently is "damaged" by the tree I have not contributed substantially to the present situation and must thus not bear some of the responsibility?

Cheers

iamcornholio

keystone wrote: »

So if I deliberately build a structure within a matter of feet of an established tree ...

The fact is that in law, the owner is responsible for any damage caused by his tree roots.

Whether your hypothetical structure is built to relevant standards to protect it from known tree roots, or whether the structure is just plonked on the ground willy nilly, will be something to consider.

But, yes you can build your structure next to someone else's existing tree and not be responsible for any subsequent damage caused by the tree. The roots can be deemed a trespass, or (for say ground shrinkage) the tree will be causing a nuisance

Even if it has a TPO on it, it will not matter. Property damage is paid for by the person causing it or in control of the thing causing it

keystone

iamcornholio wrote: »

Whether your hypothetical structure is built to relevant standards to protect it from known tree roots, or whether the structure is just plonked on the ground willy nilly, will be something to consider.

Yes - thats entirely my point in this case.

Cheers