Dead tree overhanging garden

papermate

Slithery wrote: »

As far as I'm aware you are perfectly within your rights to cut down vegetation that overhangs your land, as long as you give all the cuttings to the owner.

Cheers Slithery

As I understand it, the problem is that it's hazardous enough felling a 30 odd foot tree that's rotten from it's base, let alone attempting to remove it from the top down in sections. As I said the most viable way to dispose of it is to cut it down in the traditional way from inside the neighbour's property.

glasgowdan

Can you post some photos? 30ft isn't huge.

moneyistooshorttomention

NeilCr wrote: »

The link indicates that local authorities can do something about trees on private property, though, if they are dangerous.

To be honest if I thought a tree was going to cause damage to humans and/or property I'd certainly lop down the overhanging branches as soon as I could

Which might be the best route to go down.

I'm guessing this man doesnt know that, now he has been told in writing (copy kept I hope?) that he is putting people at risk of getting killed by his tree - then the date on your letter is his "date of knowledge". That being a date you can prove he was warned his tree might kill someone.

So, if it does end up killing or injuring someone, then the first thing that should be done is that copy of your letter proving he had been officially warned this might happen should be hauled out to prove he was aware and is due for whatever penalty/compensation claim comes in his direction.

I know I've recently taken the precaution of telling someone in writing (with a date on it) that what they are up to is unsafe and might kill/injure other people and I hope that will make them "behave" and stop risking other peoples safety on the one hand. If it doesnt - and other people suffer because of them - then I will make my copy letter available to whoever needs it to prove they have been told.

Davesnave

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

I'm guessing this man doesnt know that, now he has been told in writing (copy kept I hope?) that he is putting people at risk of getting killed by his tree - then the date on your letter is his "date of knowledge". That being a date you can prove he was warned his tree might kill someone.

We were all warned a few days ago that the world was coming to an end, but not many of us took note. This was because it wasn't Prof Brian Cox saying it, just some[STRIKE] nutters[/STRIKE] people quoting ancient texts etc. They 'knew' it, but it turns out they didn't.

Similarly, someone being warned about a tree will take note of who's doing the warning. If it's a qualified tree surgeon, they would be foolish to ignore the advice and provably negligent.

I think an expert opinion is required.

G_M

Who owns the land over which it hangs? ie the car park you use. Do you own it, or do you simply have a right to park there on someone else's land?

This is relevant because a landowner can simply cut back a tree that overhangs there own land. They can't remove the tree - just the branches that extend over their own land. As pointed out above, strictly speaking the branches removed belong to the tree-owner and should be given or offered back.

But if you live in a flat, and just have a right to use the car park, then it's your freeholder (who owns the car park) who should cut back the tree.

papermate

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Which might be the best route to go down.

I'm guessing this man doesnt know that, now he has been told in writing (copy kept I hope?) that he is putting people at risk of getting killed by his tree - then the date on your letter is his "date of knowledge". That being a date you can prove he was warned his tree might kill someone.

So, if it does end up killing or injuring someone, then the first thing that should be done is that copy of your letter proving he had been officially warned this might happen should be hauled out to prove he was aware and is due for whatever penalty/compensation claim comes in his direction.

I know I've recently taken the precaution of telling someone in writing (with a date on it) that what they are up to is unsafe and might kill/injure other people and I hope that will make them "behave" and stop risking other peoples safety on the one hand. If it doesnt - and other people suffer because of them - then I will make my copy letter available to whoever needs it to prove they have been told.

glasgowdan, I'll add a photo when I can work out how to attach it.

moneyistooshorttomention - You are of course correct in your take on this. In my last conversation with him (no witnesses) I asked if he had received my email and he confirmed that he had, but I don't think that will stand in court. So, I think a letter is probably the way to go. The suggestion of a letter sent to the freeholder sounds good to me, seeing that this guy no longer has a permanent UK address.

Thing is though, I would really like to find out who is responsible for the land this tree is on for certain. Does anyone now if the freeholder's responsibility is absolved when a leaseholder has an agreement that specifies them taking ownership of the land (forgive me I'm crap at this stuff) i.e. if in the leaseholders lease, his property has use of the garden (and responsibility for it, in all its forms). I basically need to focus on the responsible party.

papermate

Thaks Davesnave,
Yup, you are right, and in conversation with him I offered to get some quotes from arborists for him, for the work to be done. He sort of grunted a bit at that and said he was very busy and had to go to a meeting or something. Like I said, he's quite a character.

Hi G_M
I am a freeholder with three other freeholders that own the land so it's our car park and not an issue. The physical act of cutting it back though is the quite relevant here. Ask a tree surgeon and they would say just take it down, it's dead. Rather than, lets fanny around risking life and injury, cutting limbs high up in the tree rather than sawing it low down in the trunk and thereby doing it efficiently,

Mojisola

papermate wrote: »

Ask a tree surgeon and they would say just take it down, it's dead. Rather than, lets fanny around risking life and injury, cutting limbs high up in the tree rather than sawing it low down in the trunk and thereby doing it efficiently,

Have you actually asked a tree surgeon? I've never seen one do a lumberjack job in an urban area. Several local trees have been taken down and each was removed limb by limb and the trunk was also taken down in stages.

Davesnave

Mojisola wrote: »

Have you actually asked a tree surgeon? I've never seen one do a lumberjack job in an urban area. Several local trees have been taken down and each was removed limb by limb and the trunk was also taken down in stages.

If there are vehicles underneath this tree, it's probable that a cherry-picker could be used to take it down from the top, if it's too far gone to climb.

No proper tree surgeon will just drop a whole tree in a garden space where it abuts the boundary.

glasgowdan

We haven't seen the tree. It doesn't sound like a particularly huge or heavy one, and a single cut can be the answer in some cases. But we don't know yet.