Neighbour has made my tree unsafe

LABMAN

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

Down south.

It was about 25ft high if not more.

OP's tree was double that size.

binao

LABMAN wrote: »

OP's tree was double that size.

Ahh, but was it, "Down south"?

MarkCarnage

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

There is no way this would cost £2000.

We have just had a huge tree removed for £400

Wrong. I had a large sycamore taken down two years ago by a qualified tree surgeon whom I know. Cost well over £1,000 as it was 3 men for a full day plus all the removal costs. Another £400 to have stump ground out. I got another indicative quote and it was even higher.

MarkCarnage

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

Down south.

It was about 25ft high if not more.

25ft is quite a small tree. OP suggests this is at least 50 feet high. Ours was nearly 70 ft. Had a tree preservation order, but tree surgeon advised it was diseased and becoming dangerous. Council confirmed this and gave us verbal go ahead there and then while planning faffed about - we got the formal planning approval 4 months after it came down!

Davesnave

There is a significant difference between a 25' tree and one twice that size.


To put this in context, last winter, my wife and I took down a 25' Cherry that had grown over-large and outstayed its welcome. It was around 30-35 cm diameter near the base and I felled it with a 14" chain saw in a matter of 5 minutes.


We now have a Wych Elm that's on its last legs. This has 3 stems up to 45cm diameter and is 35- 40' tall. It's in a completely different league and there's no safe way for us to fell it, even in 3 parts. We will have to pay to have someone climb and cut it down in stages.


The difference between 30 and 45cm diameter doesn't sound like much, but it's very different and that's why the costs increase so much.