Conifers

carefullycautious

I would not touch with a bargepole.

Some years ago I planted 3 to obscure view of a shed. We let them grow to about 5 feet in height and then decided we did not like them.

What a nightmare to get out. The roots were so thick and had spread some distance towards the house that we were so glad we had tackled them after a couple of years and not left them too long. God knows how we would have got them out.

I would never have them as close as you say they are :eek:

lexilex

I am hearing conflicting stories from different people! Some are saying they won't be a problem, some saying avoid like the plague.

Boyfriend has suddenly remembered he knows a tree surgeon He spoke to him briefly yesterday and he doesn't seem to think we would have an issue. He's going to get more information today.

Davesnave

lexilex wrote: »

I am hearing conflicting stories from different people! Some are saying they won't be a problem, some saying avoid like the plague.

Boyfriend has suddenly remembered he knows a tree surgeon He spoke to him briefly yesterday and he doesn't seem to think we would have an issue. He's going to get more information today.

You will hear conflicting opinions.

Some people are extremely risk-averse or lack practical knowledge, so they may rubbish anything that would worry them. Some also tend to equate asking for advice with naivety, so they fear you won't walk away if the problem turns out to be very hard to resolve.

Such people have probably never knowingly bought a house with an issue of some kind, but that might restrict them to property of a mundane nature within their price band. The real bargains are usually not without problems, so any potential purchaser always has to ascertain:

• What exactly each problem is
• Whether the problem may be resolved
• What actions must be taken
• What the cost of the actions is likely to be and whether it can be spread long term
• Whether they have the time, energy and commitment to deal with the problem

In the case of this property, the most difficult thing to work out is what's happened between the neighbours and whether the tree issue can be resolved amicably should you buy.

Having built things like reinforced underground structures, I know it's possible that a physical solution would be available in this kind of situation. The real wild card here is the neighbour, which is why I suggested you make contact earlier. I would rather deal with a structural problem than a bonkers neighbour any day of the week!

AlexMac

Another consideration; insurance- when I shopped around to reduce my premium recently, one insurer required me to confirm there were no trees with X metres of my house... forgot exactly, but maybe as much as 6m. There weren't (just) in that there are two massive leylandii 2 gardens away- about 10m. But they do block the light to our place for at least 4 hours each day- luckily we like a shady garden... but if you don't?

lexilex

Davesnave wrote: »

In the case of this property, the most difficult thing to work out is what's happened between the neighbours and whether the tree issue can be resolved amicably should you buy.

Having built things like reinforced underground structures, I know it's possible that a physical solution would be available in this kind of situation. The real wild card here is the neighbour, which is why I suggested you make contact earlier. I would rather deal with a structural problem than a bonkers neighbour any day of the week!

Managed to speak to the neighbours this morning. They're lovely. They're in quite bad health at the moment, but they are hoping to have the trees cut down to a reasonable height asap. I can't imagine we would have any trouble with the neighbours other than these trees. I do wonder if there has been a bit of a clash of personalities between the neighbour and the vendor.

AlexMac wrote: »

Another consideration; insurance- when I shopped around to reduce my premium recently, one insurer required me to confirm there were no trees with X metres of my house... forgot exactly, but maybe as much as 6m. There weren't (just) in that there are two massive leylandii 2 gardens away- about 10m. But they do block the light to our place for at least 4 hours each day- luckily we like a shady garden... but if you don't?

This is a concern. I have had quotes and the trees themselves don't seem to alter the premium considerably, although I would call a few insurance companies to check on this before putting in an offer. My main worry is who would pay if any damage occured in the future, our insurance or the neighbours.

bouicca21

Worth finding out what sort of conifers they are and what kind of root ball. In my last house I took out 32 (yes, really) from the back garden. The neighbours loved me. The trees were of varying sizes, none higher than 7-10 feet. The roots were shallow and didn't spread far, so they were dead easy to remove.

moneyistooshorttomention

lexilex wrote: »

This is a concern. I have had quotes and the trees themselves don't seem to alter the premium considerably, although I would call a few insurance companies to check on this before putting in an offer. My main worry is who would pay if any damage occured in the future, our insurance or the neighbours.

From research I did on this sort of problem, I came to the conclusion that it would be the culprits insurance company that would bear the cost of putting right any tree damage to the innocent neighbours' house.

The thing being though that Culprit Neighbour had to be asked, then asked in writing, then have a letter officially "putting them under notice" to remove the trees (obviously sent Recorded Delivery and copies kept). At that point Innocent Neighbour would have proof that they had taken all possible action to prevent any damage to the house and Culprit Neighbours' insurance company would be the ones who would have to pay.

It does have to be borne in mind that I believe the statistics are that about half of British home-owners don't have insurance on their houses:eek:. It is the case though that any home-owner with a mortgage would have to have insurance, because their mortgage company would insist on it.

Ultimately, if a Culprit Neighbours tree does cause damage and they don't have insurance, then they DO have money available to cover the cost themselves (ie whatever equity they have tied-up in the house could be released to be available for this purpose if they could only pay up themselves by means of selling the house).

Worth having a word with a solicitor to confirm that this position, as I understand it, is indeed correct. If correct, then the Culprit Neighbour could ultimately lose their house if they damage your house as I understand it (assuming worst case analysis of them not having insurance).

lexilex

Thanks again everybody for your really helpful replies.

A bit of an update, after our second viewing we decided to make an offer. We have had advice from lot's of different people (obviously including you guys!) and feel comfortable to trees are okay. We have also read the vendors survey which reported no issues.

Over 24 hours since our offer and I am losing patience.