Falling tree on my car , is anybody liable ?

InsideInsurance

These things are predominately covered by common law and the torts of negligence. Councils and some other organisations have legislation that they also need to follow and thus have a higher duty of care.

Generally negligence is very simple, its doing something a reasonable person wouldn't do or failing to do something that a reasonable person would do. It is basically up to the judges in courts to decide if it is reasonable (often substituted for common practice) or not for someone to do something or not.

If a judge thought it reasonable that someone should get their trees inspected every year then you would probably win even if there were no other issues other than the fact the landowner hadnt done that. Personally however I've never had any of my trees looked at by any form of expert at any time in my life. Have you?

smashingyour...

TrickyWicky wrote: »

Trees typically fall under acts of god and many insurers simply won't pay out for it. We had one in the back garden that went through the neighbours fence. The neighbour was decent enough to buy new fence panels but the insurers refused to reimburse him saying it was an act of god and therefore not covered.

You could still try but I dont like your chances and suspect that you'll have to claim on your own insurance or at least speak to their legal protection team if you have legal protection.

You sound like a good neighbour, did you offer to go halves?

pimento

Steven811 wrote: »

If the tree was not maintained you could say who ever owns the tree is responsible for maintaining it.
To find who owns the tree you would need to find who owns the land.
I know there's a company called xxxx.co.uk they may be able to help.

Hm. New member, five posts and they all mention the same web site.

sydenhambased

GMTA Pimento - I've just hit the "Spam" button on all 5. I'm new too so I'm guessing it'll take a few regulars (such as yourself) to get him PPR'd...

atrixblue.-MFR-.

The burden of proof lies with you to prove that the landowner is negligent.


unfortunately some tree's are subject to protections and land owners cant maintain them efficiently and as often as they would like or they face being in trouble due to the processes of red taped paper work to get permission to alter or maintain them and in such event like this happening its would simply be an act of god.


saying that the highways department DO have a responsibility to ensure that the roads are risk assessed and overhanging branches on carriage ways are part of that assessment, where they encounter what they believe are low/dangerous hanging tree branches that pose a risk to road users they have a duty of care to inform the landowner to take action, such information you could request from the highways department to see if they had concerns on this stretch of road regarding that side of the boundary with dangerous/low hanging branches and if they have informed the landowner and when, I know my local authority also have tree surgeons to assess road bankside tree's for their condition, and have them cut down or cut to boundary if they pose a risk and the landowner doesn't take action. your local department is probably your best way forward in getting evidence and information to build a case for negligence.
You could Also request the aid of a qualified tree surgeon to meet you on site of the offending tree and he give you a report as to how in his professional opinion the branch snapped and the condition of the tree itself, if the report comes back as the tree is healthy and in his opinion the weight of the leaves on the tree lent a hand in the tree branch snapping, and was undetectable then I would accept it and move on, but if it turns out that the tree is in a bad way, or that someone has attempted to maintain it but didn't do a good enough job, then you have further evidence to recouperate the losses you have had through the landowners insurance or through a private court claim.

Aretnap

This thread is nearly a year old and was resurrected by a spammer. I imagine that by now the OP has either got his money back or given up on it - either way he probably doesn't need any more help.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

Aretnap wrote: »

This thread is nearly a year old and was resurrected by a spammer. I imagine that by now the OP has either got his money back or given up on it - either way he probably doesn't need any more help.

teach me for not looking at the date of thread! LOL