Buying a house with a large TPO tree in front garden

bris

I can save you the expense of a full structural survey (for that problem anyway) yes the surveyor will treat it as a risk, he can't do anything else. He needs to cover his back as it's impossible to say one way or the other whether or not it is or isn't so they will side with caution so they can't get sued.


I wouldn't be to concerned about it a it's roots will be well established, but it may put me off the house depending on whether or not the tree was a nuisance just being there or not.

conradmum

Anything that makes you think twice about buying a house will also put prospective buyers off when you want to sell the house.

flora48

Unless this house is super special to you I would look elsewhere. Given that it is said that the root spread is as great as the crown, that there is as much underground as above ground, there may well be problems ahead. My insurance company has now started asking about the proximity of trees.

This just makes life more complicated unless this is your dream home.

moneyistooshorttomention

Out of interest, my own insurance company was obviously unhappy if a tree was within a certain distance of my last house and would only "allow" a tree to grow to a certain height before they got concerned and they would still be concerned even if it was a neighbours tree.

I never did find out whether that "concern" would have been expressed as a higher premium or as a refusal to insure my house at all if tree over certain height was nearby.

Which is it of these two - dearer premiums or no cover at all?

Davesnave

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Which is it of these two - dearer premiums or no cover at all?

Maybe neither.

I read somewhere that if a tree with a TPO begins to damage an insured property, the insurer may put pressure on the council to remove the restriction, arguing that if it doesn't, it will become liable for any further damage.

I also believe that many councils bottle-out at that point.

Something the OP could research, perhaps?

Yorkie1

Davesnave wrote: »

Maybe neither.

I read somewhere that if a tree with a TPO begins to damage an insured property, the insurer may put pressure on the council to remove the restriction, arguing that if it doesn't, it will become liable for any further damage.

I also believe that many councils bottle-out at that point.

Something the OP could research, perhaps?

Or not ... :eek:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-15180985

I_have_spoken

Walk away !