Overhanging oak tree trim/removal request

marcofoo

I own some land bordering a house. The land has several oak trees, one of which overhangs the garage belonging to the owner of the house. The tree is large and in good health but the owner has written us a letter requesting that we pay for the overhanging branches to be trimmed. A tree surgeon quote accompanies the letter detailing costs of £300, which seems reasonable but I do not believe the work to be essential.

I have liability insurance and am willing to seek expert advice on the health of the tree. With insurance and a good report is there anything else that I am expected to do/have? I've always thought that people are entitled to trim overhanging branches but this tree could be susceptible to movement if branches are trimmed due to the sheer size and weight of it. It also borders an A road.

If I have to tend to the tree then my preference would be to take it down entirely, but it would be a shame to do this to a healthy tree.

Thanks in advance.

rickeeee

Check that it does not have a preservation order on it.

Local council.

marcofoo

rickeeee wrote: »

Check that it does not have a preservation order on it.

Local council.

It does not.

DaftyDuck

Then leave it be. The oak will then still be there, long after you are encased in a 6 foot box made from one of its grandparents.

mapcr77

I haven't much to say other than it is a shame to cut down a tree unnecessarily. I can't understand people who think that in a second they can get rid of something that has taken decades -probably more- to grow.

Expert advice is definitely the way to go. You may trim some branches on their side (and perhaps a bit on the other to balance the weight), just to please the neighbour and avoid an escalation on their requests.

I hope you sort out the problem with the neighbour with the best interest of the tree at hand!

aliasojo

Op, is there a specific reason the neighbour would like the tree trimmed?

Perhaps if the reasoning was known, appropriate ways forward could be suggested.

martinsurrey

As it overhangs several people’s property (and is huge) you need to check your insurance coverage.

For example you may only be covered if it’s subject to regular inspection by a qualified tree surgeon.

If a branch in the crown is rotting and falls on a pavement killing someone, you can expect a hefty legal bill (but if you get it inspected by someone, you can sue them).

Strapped

I'd see it as a good thing that the owners of the house have consulted a tree surgeon. If they just got up a ladder and lopped off the branches themselves (as they're entitled to if it overhangs their property) the tree could be harmed.

Fuzzyness

if the neighbour wants to cut it back there is nothing stopping him cutting back the bits that overhang his property. he's only asking you to do it as he doesnt want to pay. stick to your guns.

PollyOnAMission

I've asked my resident tree surgeon and tree consultant. Here is his response:


From the tree owners point of view: They have no obligation to cut the tree, unless it can be shown that the tree is causing direct damage to the garage, e.g. by scraping in the wind, or by falling branches, etc. Falling leaves and fruit are not generally considered something for which you can be liable.

From the point of view of the neighbour: They have the right to cut branches overhanging a boundary, so long as they do not do undue damage to the tree – for example by severing roots or unbalancing the tree by pruning, which subsequently results in it falling down, etc. It is not usual for the cost of trimming to a boundary to be recouped from the owner of the tree.

In regards to the neighbours claim to pay for overhanging branches: if no damage is being caused, I would decline to pay.

However, it sounds from the description that this tree is large, and if it is bordering an A road, it should be subject to some inspection routine. Liability insurance will not protect anyone, if they are found to be negligent in their responsibility as a tree owner. An insurance company will never pay out if a foreseeable problemc auses damage to people or property. If the owner is not competent in judging the safety of a tree, then I would strongly advise them to get the tree inspected by a professional arboricultural consultant, specifically NOT a tree surgeon. Some tree surgeons are also consultants, but I would steer clear, and look for an independent one.

As a minimum, you would expect the consultant to have a LANTRA professional tree inspection certificate, and probably a Diploma in Arboriculture, or similar level qualification. Ideally they should be accredited by the Arboricultural Association, or a Chartered Arboriculturalist with the Institute of Chartered Foresters.

The consultant will inspect the tree and essentially underwrite the tree, taking responsibility for it, in case of failure. It would need to be inspected periodically for it to remain underwritten.They will also be able to advise on the issue of the garages.

As a side note, if the tree is considered valuable (and it sounds like it, from the size of it); I would not rely on the neighbour to arrange works on the tree without some input. At least check that the tree surgeon is qualified, if not you may find that th eneighbour ruins the tree, and leaves the owner with another bill to have the damage rectified, perhaps by taking the tree down. Bad tree surgery is often worse than no tree surgery. A consultant will be able to advise you on these sorts of issues.


Hope that helps!

marcofoo

Thanks. You've all been a great help and i think I now have the advice I need to proceed without taking the tree down.

Consider the tree saved - I hope!