Neighbour cut tree roots. Tree now fell down

Yorkie1

Yes, it's criminal damage if you wanted to pursue that angle.

But, OP, what do you actually want now that this has happened? You don't say in your post. Do you want to report it as criminal damage to the police (I'm not convinced they'd be overly interested in the absence of evidence of malice). Do you want to ensure you're not out of pocket dealing with the outcome? Do you just want an apology?

Has the tree caused damage to anything when falling? You can cuantify that loss.

Is the tree going to be easy to get rid of / chop up if need be? Do you want / need to get the stump out? Will it cost you to do so or can you do it yourself? If necessary, again you can quantify that loss.

What do you want to replace the tree? Contribution towards the replacement?

You don't want this to escalate into a neighbour dispute, so consider carefully how your neighbour might respond to your requests. If it might get difficult, you may have separate legal advice on your home insurance to discuss the position with before you start. If it can be resolved without actually contacting the insurance company about the potential claim then so much the better (nothing to declare in future).

I_have_spoken

there is a large conifer tree as tall as the house

Neighbour has done you a favour!

macman

It's not criminal damage, unless there's evidence that he did it with the intention of felling the tree. It's a civil matter, why on earth would the police be interested in this?

cyclonebri1

I_have_spoken wrote: »

Neighbour has done you a favour!

I was just about to post exactly the same words:T:T:T:T


I'd just like to know if there have actually been similar cases taken to court?, and what was the result.

I understand what Keystone and others have said, it seems to be the normal reply, but when a trespasser, the roots, is removed from a property where it is not wanted, there is some poetic justice in the tree dropping. :T. It seems wrong that a neighbour can grow a tree in your/my property, because that is effectively what he is doing.

The best thing is the tree almost always falls away from the cuts:D


Good job Swampy wasn't up there. Don't tell us he was:D:D

Davesnave

People on these forums are always doing the back room barrister thing, but the reality is that it costs serious time and money to pursue people through the legal system, and even then you have no great certainty of a result.

What's certain is that you'll end up with a neighbour dispute and the very real possibility of future hostility, manifesting itself in unpredictable ways.

In this case I'd go for damage limitation, by pleasant negotiation with the neighbour, if possible. There might be some mileage in asking for help with the costs of disposal. If not, an advert on Gumtree, Freecycle, Freegle or similar may put you in touch with wood-burning folk.

Look on the bright side, your neighbour has just given you a nice new fence and the opportunity to plant anew, this time not so close that things which grow large, end up astride the boundary.

Lean_Dipstick

Some years ago my car was crushed by a large conifer that fell over in the strong wind at the office car park. I was advised then that conifers are notorious for having shallow roots compared with other trees. Their suppleness and having narrow leaves is what normally gives them good wind resistance - until they get old. Sadly, the remaining avenue of mature conifers at the office were subsequently removed as a precaution.

The point is that the tall and mature harveybobbles tree may well have been healthy but could have fallen over in the "horrendous wind" anyway. In which case, cutting the roots may have saved the fence and subsequent claim for damage from the neighbour (or worse). Just saying.

SailorSam

You are allowed to cut back any roots as far as the boundary but if this makes the tree unstable you may be liable.
http://www.stalbans.gov.uk/environmentandwaste/trees-and-woodlands/yourrightsregardingyourneighbourstrees.aspx

lostinrates

Davesnave wrote: »

People on these forums are always doing the back room barrister thing, but the reality is that it costs serious time and money to pursue people through the legal system, and even then you have no great certainty of a result.

What's certain is that you'll end up with a neighbour dispute and the very real possibility of future hostility, manifesting itself in unpredictable ways.

In this case I'd go for damage limitation, by pleasant negotiation with the neighbour, if possible. There might be some mileage in asking for help with the costs of disposal. If not, an advert on Gumtree, Freecycle, Freegle or similar may put you in touch with wood-burning folk.

Look on the bright side, your neighbour has just given you a nice new fence and the opportunity to plant anew, this time not so close that things which grow large, end up astride the boundary.

Couldn't agree more.

Couple of years ago our neighbour accidentally knocked down one of the walls dividing our working livestock yards. They made a temporary fix and came straight round.....


We asked. 'Are any of the animals (theirs or ours) hurt?' And 'are you and the tractor ok?' And then agreed it was silly to try and rebuild a wall in sub zero temps, checked the temp fix was safe till spring and one day in spring it all got fixed. My husband IS a lawyer, we wouldn't make trouble where none is needed, its pointless, expensive and serves only to make one's own life miserable.

Somethings are worth worrying about, others are not. They cannot glue the tree back, they can clear up and buy a new one of your choice.

You can all have a cup of tea and agree good neighbour relations are the most important thing of all.

Ongoing neighbour problems are a different kettle of fish, but this can be turned to an advantage if need be longer term.

We all are responsible when things go wrong sometimes. I'd play it cool on the criminal damage line unless they are unwilling to make good personally.

SailorSam

We've all got to live together, better to say the magic word ..... Sorry, and think well it's not the end of the world.

keystone

macman wrote: »

It's not criminal damage, unless there's evidence that he did it with the intention of felling the tree. It's a civil matter, why on earth would the police be interested in this?

Actually yes it is:

"A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an offence."

It doesn't matter whether the police would actually be interested.

Cheers