Council Tree Branch Falls Onto Car

bigadaj

Robisere wrote: »

IF you can wade through all the gobbledegook, this (eventually) points out that the local Council Highways Department IS responsible for trees at the roadside of an adopted Highway:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/66/section/154

In other words, if the trees are growing at the side of a highway, the Council is responsible for them. If they are actually growing on private property that is not owned and administered by the Council, the landowner is responsible.

3 years ago, our overzealous Council Highways took it upon themselves to take down a lovely old Elm that had been growing at the side of the A road in our village for many decades. A local scientist tried to prevent this, as the tree was not unsafe in any way. He proved that it was not subject to Dutch Elm Disease and he commissioned a professional dendrochronogist to prove that, and also prove that it was not dangerous. The Council took it down anyway, quoting the 'fact' that it "...might in the future develop DE Disease" ! The Parish Council took their own County Council to court over this, and won a hollow victory, because the tree was taken down before the Environment Agency could act. Three separate agencies, arguing over a beautiful old, but perfectly healthy tree, it was a pantomime which ended in the Councill officer who gave the order, losing his job.

Sometimes life is just too daft for laughter.

Don't see why that's daft, that's a natural consequence of the legislation you've just quoted.

Amey as the council contractor in Sheffield took down large numbers of mature trees on residential roads a few years ago, primarily due to the cost and damage to pavements from their roots. Large local protests but as well as the cost in surfacing and maintenance the council will be aware if the potential for claims in future and it's easier and cheaper to tackle the potential problem at source, even at the loss of mature trees and their habitat and social utility.

bigadaj

Johno100 wrote: »

Doubtful as no one was seriously hurt or killed.

Yes, exactly my point.

Johno100

bigadaj wrote: »

Yes, exactly my point.

But councils can't just sit there with their fingers crossed, not maintain their tree stock and hope nobody is killed.

Car_54

Robisere wrote: »

IF you can wade through all the gobbledegook, this (eventually) points out that the local Council Highways Department IS responsible for trees at the roadside of an adopted Highway:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/66/section/154

It doesn't. It simply gives the council the power to have the trees cut back etc., but it doesn't require them to do so.

They do have the responsibility, but not from that particular bit of legislation.

10shinhan

sevenhills wrote: »

Did the tree surgeon come to cut the tree from on top of your wifes car(after the accident), or was he already there doing some work?

The council won't tell me the details :rotfl:

It's the same incident as in Febuary, and I'm happier with the amount of responses this time. I think it all comes down to proving liability, not sure how I can.

One user said a FOI request, that sounds like a good idea?

bigadaj

10shinhan wrote: »

The council won't tell me the details :rotfl:

It's the same incident as in Febuary, and I'm happier with the amount of responses this time. I think it all comes down to proving liability, not sure how I can.

One user said a FOI request, that sounds like a good idea?

It's worth a go, simple request for tree works being undertaken for the few days around the incident. The problem is if you suspect that the tree surgeon caused the damage it may simply state that they attended and whether that was to undertake works that caused the damage or simply made it safe afterwards may well not be stated.

You've presumably made a claim on your insurance, have you spoken to them about whether they can or will make a claim on the council insurance?

Robisere

bigadaj wrote: »

Don't see why that's daft, that's a natural consequence of the legislation you've just quoted.

Amey as the council contractor in Sheffield took down large numbers of mature trees on residential roads a few years ago, primarily due to the cost and damage to pavements from their roots. Large local protests but as well as the cost in surfacing and maintenance the council will be aware if the potential for claims in future and it's easier and cheaper to tackle the potential problem at source, even at the loss of mature trees and their habitat and social utility.

There is a difference between trees at the side of a highway in a large urban area like Sheffield, and those in a small, rural, Lincolnshire village. The tree in our village was set back away from the road by at least 3 metres, it was growing in a wide grassed area and there was no pavement or buildings behind it, for roots to damage. Locals were rightly incensed by the Highways taking down a perfectly good tree that had been there for generations, especially after an expert in the field had advised them that it was perfectly, structurally safe and not diseased.

Car_54

bigadaj wrote: »

It's worth a go, simple request for tree works being undertaken for the few days around the incident. The problem is if you suspect that the tree surgeon caused the damage it may simply state that they attended and whether that was to undertake works that caused the damage or simply made it safe afterwards may well not be stated.

You've presumably made a claim on your insurance, have you spoken to them about whether they can or will make a claim on the council insurance?

Also request records of routine inspections/maintenance.

10shinhan

bigadaj wrote: »

It's worth a go, simple request for tree works being undertaken for the few days around the incident. The problem is if you suspect that the tree surgeon caused the damage it may simply state that they attended and whether that was to undertake works that caused the damage or simply made it safe afterwards may well not be stated.

You've presumably made a claim on your insurance, have you spoken to them about whether they can or will make a claim on the council insurance?

I would have to pay and they told me I wouldn't get my excess back.
So I doubt they would chase them.