Neighbour has cut down 7 of my trees!

sevenhills

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Admits I'm intrigued as to what church it is next door exactly and just who "God's representative on Earth" has been in this instance....:cool:

My dog was walking on the local churches grassed area, the church warden told me where he would shove any poo, if I didnt pick it up; very un-Christian attitude if you ask me

naf123

Depending on which Church, I am guessing it is the Church of England - is an incredibly wealthy organisation with £8 billion + in investments plus many billions more in assets.

If I were you, I would sue the hell out of them!

moneyistooshorttomention

naf123 wrote: »

Depending on which Church, I am guessing it is the Church of England - is an incredibly wealthy organisation with £8 billion + in investments plus many billions more in assets.

If I were you, I would sue the hell out of them!

Well - if it's the C of E and with all those assets = they can afford a LOT better lawyers than any of us:cool:

ljbnotts

sevenhills wrote: »

I cannot believe that a contractor would stump 7 trees that were only meant to be trimmed. Surely there would be an agreed price for the work? Trimming vs stumping trees would be a very different quote.
You added at the end, that your neighbour is a church, I know churchwardens that look after the land can be grump old men; but peraps if you take your concerns directly to the church?

We also couldn't believe it! I'll try and post some pictures later as it is quite shocking that someone can cut down 7 40 ft trees over a fence to about 5 ft stumps and think that's acceptable!

Thanks for all the replies.

We never planted the trees but have maintained them, If we were asked to trim them we would have used a qualified insured tree surgeon. We did have them trimmed properly 2 years ago. They would not be my first choice but they were planted about 30 years ago and do provide a good screening into our back garden. We would look at replacing them with something different as i agree with others that Leylandi are awful trees! The trees are on our property which backs onto the Church's car park. It is not a C of E Church. The fence was also damaged during the process. We think that we have joint responsibility for the fence.

We have spoken to the Minister who assured me they would rectify the situation. They then passed it on to their Liability insurance company who have said they are not liable. We do want to keep things friendly and don't particularly want to sue anybody, we certainly don't want revenge but do want the situation that was not our fault being rectified quickly and properly.

We feel that by saying they would rectify the work means they have accepted liability.

We are going to speak to our House insurance as we have legal cover and see what they say.

We are pretty stunned that the insurance company has denied liability as we never spoke to the contractors beforehand and had to wait a good few weeks before we were told who they where. We never had any agreement with them, our verbal agreement was with the Church Minister and what actually happened was far removed to trimming overhanging branches.

Thanks for everyone's opinions/advice.

Ljbnotts

EachPenny

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

- what conclusions any stranger draws as to who is "in the right" if they know one household has one or more leylandii in their garden (particularly if they are the ones that planted them). It's basically regarded in a not very positive light to be a leylandii planter...

In normal circumstances you'd be right, but where the neighbour is something like a commercial premises, different rules might apply.

For example a nice tall leylandii hedge might provide a very effective screen against loud music and singing, or against noise and headlights from cars entering and leaving a car park, or (perhaps to a lesser extent) against bell ringing.

If the OP is now more exposed to the adverse effects of commercial-type activity than they were previously then community sympathy might be more divided.

silvercar

It is not a C of E Church.

If you say what group it is, someone may be able to advise further.

I would try to get in touch with the organisation that is in charge of the group of churches. They will probably arrange the insurance for individual churches and have direct contact with the appropriate person.

In my mind, your local church warden has arranged this to be done while you were away in order to cut down the leylandii to a level you may not have agreed to if you were home. Probably a cash job with an uninsured man with a chain saw, rather than a professional tree surgeon. Too much of a coincidence that the work was done while you were on holiday and by someone uninsured and arranged by the local warden.

Rosemary7391

silvercar wrote: »

If you say what group it is, someone may be able to advise further.

I would try to get in touch with the organisation that is in charge of the group of churches. They will probably arrange the insurance for individual churches and have direct contact with the appropriate person.

In my mind, your local church warden has arranged this to be done while you were away in order to cut down the leylandii to a level you may not have agreed to if you were home. Probably a cash job with an uninsured man with a chain saw, rather than a professional tree surgeon. Too much of a coincidence that the work was done while you were on holiday and by someone uninsured and arranged by the local warden.

Second the request for the denomination. It might help you figure out who best to speak to.



It's really unlikely that the national organisation will be able to get involved. Typically local churches are individual charities. It also sounds like this hasn't gone through the entire process with the local church - they've tried to claim on their insurance and been told no, so some further work is obviously needed to work out the best way forward. Working with them is likely to be the best way forward - I expect they'll want to keep up good relations.



I really doubt it was deliberately done while OP was away. Could be a chinese whispers case. No need to assume malice at this stage!

ljbnotts

Its a Pentecostal Church.

I'm sure it wasn't done deliberately, although i do think it was a cash in hand type job done as a favor. (the Minister did say as much to me when i first went round) We have all agreed we want to keep good neighbourly relations but we're just at a loss as to how move forward.

If the Church's insurance say they are not liable, and we need to pursue the contractor, the only option seems that to go down a legal route with our house insurance as we never employed the contractor and firmly believe it is the Church's liability and responsibility to rectify the damage caused.

The trees were providing screening from the car park noise and car lights, they now are not.

thanks everyone, will update when we've spoken to our insurers.

Ljbnotts

trailingspouse

Davesnave wrote: »

Are you saying the contractor employed God?

Well that little joke of mine fell flat, didn't it.
'Act of God' is a thing. Check your own insurance policies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act_of_God

EachPenny

ljbnotts wrote: »

If the Church's insurance say they are not liable, and we need to pursue the contractor, the only option seems that to go down a legal route with our house insurance as we never employed the contractor and firmly believe it is the Church's liability and responsibility to rectify the damage caused.

Unless your insurance legal advisor tells you otherwise, your claim should be against the church not the contractor. The chances are the contractor will 'vanish' if you try to make a claim against them.

Keep it clear and simple. The church are responsible, they need to cover your reasonable costs in repairing the damage. (their insurer denying liability is irrelevant)