Tree preservation order

Lonely_goat-herd

Hi. My partner has a substantial willow tree in her garden, about 10 feet from her front wall, which is subject to a TPO. She lives in a conservation area. She's been trying to sell the house for nearly a year and her latest buyer pulled out when the legal search declared the TPO - he got a tree surgeon round, who said the house was a potential threat to the stability of the house, if it hadn't already done some damage, and that he shouldn't buy the house without the tree either being felled or planning permission existing to do this.

My partner has ben trying on and off for 10 years to get the council to overturn the order, as she has always been concerned about the tree, which is now substantial. In the storms last winter, it lost several large branches, including one that landed on the roof of a car in the adjoining road, although the car wasn't damaged and no one was inside it. As a result, the tree was pollarded, but has started growing with renewed vigour.

It seems to me that the council is being intransigent, given that the tree is an obvious threat to my partner's property and has now prevented her from selling her house. Their argument is that the tree is a 'public amenity' (which is all very well, but passers-by are getting the benefits, while she is bearing all the costs). They say that if she is concerned, she should get a full structural survey done and go to the expense of underpinning the house, which will costs thousands. If we fell the tree, or get someone else to do it, we stand to be fined between £20,000 and £60,000, depending on whom you ask. It seems we're caught all ways.

Does anyone have any advice they could offer? I appreciate that this is only tangentially related to saving money, but with a house we can't sell and potential damage to the property of tens of thousands of pounds, it does have a monetary aspect.

Thanks for reading.

I_have_spoken

Does anyone have any advice they could offer?

I've read the best way is to approach your home insurers and highlight the near certainty of an insurance claim being made, either for the house or 3rd party liability.

Their legal peeps will inform the council that they will seek recompense for insurance payments made while a TPO is in place. This usually scares the council's finance folks into revoking the TPO.

That said, with a large willow it may need two seasons to remove it gradually as just chopping it down may cause ground 'heave'.

teneighty

As stated above, if the house is built on a shrinkable subsoil, cutting the tree down is likely to cause far more damage than leaving it.

Having said that, if there is not any sign of structural movement so far I suspect it is not a shrinkable sub-soil or the house foundations were designed to accommodate the tree. You would probably be better off paying for a report from a structural engineer or building surveyor rather than a tree surgeon to establish if the tree really does pose a risk of causing subsidence or to reassure potential buyers if it doesn't.

Having said that I support the public amenity argument for trees and think they should only be removed as the very last resort.

Lonely_goat-herd

Thank you, I have spoken. That's certainly a new idea we hadn't considered. We had heard it might be risky to get rid of the tree in one go, but would be happy for the process to take couple of years, if we could just get permission to do it! Appreciate your comments, thanks again.

Lonely_goat-herd

Thank you, teneighty. What's put us off the structural survey is the possibility that it will show sufficient damage to make the house even more difficult to sell, as the results would have to be declared to potential buyers. But there's an argument that at least we would know how bad the situation is. Cheers

teneighty

If it is a substantial mature willow tree 10 feet from the wall of the house you would know by now if there was any subsidence. You would be able to wave to people in the street through the huge cracks in the front wall.

I would therefore strongly suspect it is not a shrinkable sub-soil or there is a good water source nearby which is sustaining the tree without it needing to dry out the sub-soil.

You should be able to make a fairly accurate assessment yourself if you are worried about having to disclose any potentially damaging reports.

Lonely_goat-herd

OK, thanks very much for your thoughts.

Nile

Hi, Martin’s asked me to post this in these circumstances: I’ve asked Board Guides to move threads if they’ll receive a better response elsewhere (please see this rule) so this post/thread has been moved to another board, where it should get more replies. If you have any questions about this policy please email [EMAIL="forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com"]forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com[/EMAIL].

jellie

I'd be careful about speaking to your insurers - they may just end up logging it as a subsidence claim whether you ask them to or not. This could result in problems getting insurance with another company in the future for both you and any purchasers of the property.

annie123

Several points jump to mind.
Did it have TPO on it when she bought it? if it did, it didn't put her off buying so another buyer can be found as conservation areas are popular, and if it didn't she would have been informed of the intention to put a TPO on it and she could have argued her case but didn't so she is now left with the consequences.

The insurance company should have been informed of the tree and the TPO. It's on every form I've ever seen and that's a lot of forms! If they weren't and you need to claim, they won't pay up due to information withheld.

The estate agent should market the property pointing out to potential buyers that the trees in the area have a TPO. This avoids surprise to them and less cost to both parties if they withdraw because of it.

Pay out for a structural survey of the property. Yes it may cost you a few £££ but in the grand scheme of things it's a small % of the property value and could get you what you want-the property sold. Two results are possible.
It's not moved either up or down and any potential buyers can see the survey for themselves. Their mortgage company may also want to see it.
Or it is moving and your insurance company need to be informed and your property monitored or underpinned.

The council don't sound unreasonable as they allowed work on it last year. Again this can be reassuring to buyers.

If you need to sell to buy together then you could considering turning the property into a let to buy mortgage. The idea being the rent covers the mortgage and frees up her income for another mortgage on a different property.

Every property will sell at the right price for it, even in the current market. And whilst the tree is a PIA to her, it wouldn't bother me at all. Worse case scenario is underpinning and if everyone really understood what that is it wouldn't bother them either.

olly300

I live in an area where all the trees have preservation orders.

Through it doesn't stop random people pruning them illegally in front of you as you walk down the street then wonder why they end up with a 3-5 grand fine.

If you wish to remove a tree due to it causing proven structural damage, 99% of the time the council forces you to put a smaller tree of the same type in it's place or if you are lucky nearby.

I suggest instead of just going for the complete removal of the TPO you find out what the council will allow you to do so they can have a tree.