Timberrrrr !

Carlos77

Just a thought, but if its a big tree, that is close enough to the house to do some damage if it falls, be aware that killing it could potentially cause some settlement in the foundations of the rear of your house, due to the root spread

keyser666

Well if you dont want it to cause any damage to your house get it cut down.

This is down to you and should have acted way earlier. Seems you only came on here to find out whether the insurance will pay either way. Thanks for putting others premiums up

gooner63_2

keyser666 wrote: »

Well if you dont want it to cause any damage to your house get it cut down.

This is down to you and should have acted way earlier. Seems you only came on here to find out whether the insurance will pay either way. Thanks for putting others premiums up

How could I have known earlier...mmm.....I'm obviously not a tree fall predictor like you....seeing as I haven't ever claimed in 30 years of having household insurance.... seems a pretty legitimate question !

20400keith

Are your quotes just to fell the tree or do they include removal?

I took down a couple of big trees and got a firm who sell logs to collect the wood for free. They came with a chainsaw and took away the trunk and thickest branches, at no cost. I was easily able to dispose of the rest.

As for insurance cover, in my last buildings insurance application I was asked whether I had any trees within x metres of the house, whether I had any rivers nearby etc so you might want to check your policy to see if you should have told them about it - be careful that telling them now doesn't result in higher premiums.

Good luck!

gooner63_2

This tree has been there for years...with no probs....just sodden ground and high winds....has anyone got a answer ?.....or should I let it fall !

Yorkie1

Don't be stupid, of course you don't let it fall. The risks are not worth it.

The previous reference to dripping taps was not so far off the mark. Albeit on a different scale, the principle is just the same -the insurance is not there for maintenance issues.

If you failed to keep the tree in safe condition - once on notice that it could be dangerous / cause a claim - then the insurance would be probably be within their rights to refuse to pay out. Do you really want to either risk this, or to have to make a false declaration on your claim form in order to cover up your lack of action?

You can get quotes just to fell it, or to fell it and grind the stump out. The latter will cost more than the former.

Kathy535

That seems an incredibly high quote. Three years ago we had two conifers (tops level with the roof of our two storey house) removed for £500. That didn't include digging the roots out but it did include disposal of the trunks and branches. However, as Carlos77 says, we have seen some settlement to the foundations which have caused a few cracks in the house, exacerbated by a wet winter followed by a v cold winter so you might want to get more advie on this issue.

gooner63_2

Yorkie1 wrote: »

Don't be stupid, of course you don't let it fall. The risks are not worth it.

The previous reference to dripping taps was not so far off the mark. Albeit on a different scale, the principle is just the same -the insurance is not there for maintenance issues.

If you failed to keep the tree in safe condition - once on notice that it could be dangerous / cause a claim - then the insurance would be probably be within their rights to refuse to pay out. Do you really want to either risk this, or to have to make a false declaration on your claim form in order to cover up your lack of action?

You can get quotes just to fell it, or to fell it and grind the stump out. The latter will cost more than the former.

It was never unsafe....until reason weather..I've got quotes.....hence my post !

tyllwyd

If you decide to ignore it, and it falls down and causes thousands of pounds worth of damage to your house - and then for some reason the insurance doesn't pay up, what will you do?

phill99

It's expected that you, as a policy holder 'mitigate your losses'. So the water leak and ceiling collapsing is a good comparison. If there is a fault, then you are expected to deal with it as soon as possible, not let it continue which would mean the loss (and hence the cost to the insurance company) would increase.

The insurers won't pay for the removal of the tree (insurance isn't a maintenance service). However if the tree falls and it transpires that you were aware of the tree problem, it is very likely that the insurers will reduce their payout.