Conifers blocking light....

Keelyjo1

Hi

We have 2 very tall conifers and a holly lining our boundary about 2m from the side of the house on the neighbours side that block all the afternoon light. This wouldn't be so bad, but we also have 5 HUGE Monteray Cypresses also lining the boundary! happy to leave these alone, but just want to reclaim a bit of light for the patio!!! We have asked the neighbours to remove them, but having just had some planning permission passed for an extension that they were none too happy about, they are not likely to amicably comply.

As the distance between the two conifers is 3m or so, they can't be defined as a hedge (the holly is entwined in one of them) therefore I can't rely on any of the high hedges laws, therefore wonder what I can do about them?

We are having an extension built and I am hoping that the roots get damaged and therefore the trees die, however I am concerned of the damage that the dead tree roots and possibly falling bits of dead tree could do to the new extension.... Particularly as I am not convinced that the neighbours have buildings insurance...

Any help you can offer would be gratefully received.....

Thanks

paddy's_mum

Keelyjo1 wrote: »

We are having an extension built and I am hoping that the roots get damaged and therefore the trees die

I think you would be wiser to hope that the trees don't die because if your works cause the death of your neighbour's trees, you can be held liable and replacing a fully grown tree is a very expensive exercise.

Does your builder know how to protect the trees while your extension is built?

Keelyjo1

We have had an arboriculturist report done and the builder will be following the guidelines re root protection. The extension was in fact designed to avoid the roots so to be fair the risk of damaging them and killing the tree is low. My preference would obviously be to reduce the height, however as the neighbours aren't exactly going to do us any favours, we're a bit stuck...

Keelyjo1

paddy's_mum wrote: »

I think you would be wiser to hope that the trees don't die because if your works cause the death of your neighbour's trees, you can be held liable and replacing a fully grown tree is a very expensive exercise.

Sorry, I should have said...would we have to replace it with a 30ft conifer? or just one more suitable for the setting (bearing in mind we are talking 2 m from the house). Happy for there to be a tree there, and happy to pay a few hundred pounds for a replacement - just don't want a HUGE tree there!

paddy's_mum

Sorry but if (as I understand it) the trees belong to your neighbour, then what you may think, believe or want doesn't really come into it since you don't own them nor have any rights over them other than trimming back whatever may grow over your side and even then, your pruning must be judicious and not kill the tree.

It seems to me that possibly the most sensible way forward is to have a chat with the neighbours and offer to pay yourself for their trees to be professionally trimmed.

You may well be correct in assuming that the planning permission issue will not make them look overly kindly upon you but if you at least approach them nicely and are willing to put your own cash on the table, they may decide that it's better to meet you halfway than have someone hostile just over the garden fence.

Perhaps your builder could approach them, with the arboriculturalist's report in hand and suggest that it might be in everyone's interests to have any noisy or messy things all dealt with at the same time, thus shortening the 'potential ordeal' for everyone.

Please don't even think about sabotaging the trees ( ) because judges have been known to order a like-for-like replacement .... !

Hintza

Keelyjo1 wrote: »

We have had an arboriculturist report done

So the trees must have come up in the planning application then.

Your neighbour is going to be watching you like a hawk.

Is the new extension between your house and the trees? Are the trees 2m from your current house or 2m from your new extension?

pimento

If your neighbours refuse to trim the trees, advise them that if their trees should damage your extension in any way, your insurance company will be coming after their insurance company for redress and if the neighbours don't have insurance, they will be coming after them for redress.

That should focus their minds

Hintza

pimento wrote: »

That should focus their minds

Why? .

Mojisola

pimento wrote: »

If your neighbours refuse to trim the trees, advise them that if their trees should damage your extension in any way, your insurance company will be coming after their insurance company for redress and if the neighbours don't have insurance, they will be coming after them for redress.

This would be a waste of time. If the trees actually cause damage and it can be proved, then the neighbours would be expected to prevent any further damage.

Just telling someone that their trees might, in the future, cause damage doesn't make them liable at all.

pimento

Hintza wrote: »

Why? .

Well the thought that it might cost them some money.

pimento

Mojisola wrote: »

This would be a waste of time. If the trees actually cause damage and it can be proved, then the neighbours would be expected to prevent any further damage.

Just telling someone that their trees might, in the future, cause damage doesn't make them liable at all.

If I were the neighbour and I owned some trees that might fall onto my neighbours extension (as stated by the OP) and that I would be liable for any damage (as it were my trees that would cause the damage), would I want to limit my exposure to any possible monetary loss?

Of course I would. If that involved keeping my trees to a reasonable height then that's what I would do.

When my block paving developed a ridge caused by one of my own trees causing a possible trip hazard on my drive, I had the drive levelled so that my postman wouldn't trip up and sue me. My insurance company told me I wouldn't be covered if I knew about the trip hazard and did nothing about it.



ETA: AND if the neighbour would presumably be expected to pay to right any damage as well as making sure that no further damage was caused.