Neighbour wants to hire tree prumer to cut overhanging branches and send us the bill

Davesnave

Aylesbury_Duck wrote: »

Good grief that is monstrous. I think you've been negligent allowing it to grow that big unchecked.
I think you have a moral responsibility to have it professionally reduced at your expense, even if you don't have to do so.

To be fair the OP bought the house only 5 years ago and the tree is probably many decades old.

However, they bought the house with it in place and roughly the size it is now.

The big problem is that they imagined this was an enhancement. Never in their wildest dreams did they envisage the reactions of people here. This is evidenced by their assertion that the neighbours are 'jealous' of the tree:

"I believe the neighbors are using the tree as an excuse to cause issues, behind the tree is a very tall run down looking church, and our lovely tree covers this hideous building so it is pure jealously."

I'm sorry OP but this isn't how the rest of us read the situation at all. You too are entitled to your opinion, but you must now see that it is way out of kilter with what most people would deem an acceptable situation, which your neighbour(s) should not be expected to endure.

powerful_Rogue

getmore4less wrote: »

who owns that fence?

from the pic it also looks like that tree is relatively close to the building on the left(is that yours?), could well be capable of damaging that if not already at a size that is causing damage or will do when cut back/down.

If it's on the right, then I would presume the neighbours. (Unless the photo has been inverted etc)


However if I was the neighbour and owned the fence, i'd have no intention to spend money replacing it whilst that monstrosity over hangs it.

armchaireconomist

This sounds incredibly pety on both parts. Whilst I obviously don't condone the aggression etc., you have a responsibility to maintain them and your boundary features should not overhang your neighbours property... can't really blame them.

kerri_gt

There's like a house near us with several trees of that height - they're hideous, block out the light and far too big for the garden they are in. The only positive about them is they provide lots of nesting for birds.
The owner had them thinned out in the middle last year (I am not sure of the wisdom of that as now they just look very tall, and rather bare in the middle) but at least they don't block quite so much light.

I totally understand why people plant fast growing evergreens like that as screening / for privacy but they need regular pruning before they get out of control.

If (and this is just my opinion) were buying OPs house, one of the first jobs on the list would be having that tree removed and replaced with something less voluminous.

moneyistooshorttomention

Davesnave wrote: »

As in my post yesterday, before the full horror of the thing was revealed, that would be a liability for the vast majority of buyers, not an enhancement.



No church could possibly be awful enough to make it a worthwhile feature of the garden.

Agreed!

Any offer I made for OP's house would be taking into account I needed to get shot of that tree asap. I'd be swopping that fence as well whilst I was on the subject.

Le_Kirk

Your photo: -
https://prnt.sc/k1imk8

Rotor

Classic garden dispute tree - it's a leyllandii
It does rather dominate their garden.
My understanding is that they can't force you to cut the tree , nor can they charge you to do it themselves.

However if it's causing damage to their property that's a different matter and it looks like it could easily be damaging that shed and/or it's footings ; they could certainly sue you for the cost of remedying it

Edit - the church looks fine as far as i can see

AndyMc.....

Le_Kirk wrote: »

Your photo: -
https://prnt.sc/k1imk8

Why not just do this?

silverwhistle

I'll have the wood when you cut it down. Well-seasoned and de-barked it makes a fine addition to the woodpile and burns well.

molerat

That is not a tree, it is an oversized weed that needs eradicating at op's cost. I would knock at least £3K off the house value for removal.