Owner cut down tree?

jazmalinda

Previous owner cut down tree without PP, can we get in trouble for this? It was about 6 years ago

sgun

So the trees were gone in 2014. We have had a couple of hot summers and some wet winters since so ground heave would probably be showing by now if it was going to happen. What is your indemnity insurance actually insuring you against? The cost of a couple of saplings and some stump grinding? That's not expensive. You do need to consider though if this was ever enforced would you actually want two horse chestnuts growing that close to your house? They start off slow but when they get going they really do put on height fairly fast. You would be liable to replace them but not liable for any legal issues surrounding their removal.

What are you taking out indemnity insurance for regarding the potential contaminated land? It is extremely unlikely anyone is going to come along and ask all the homeowners to clean up possible contamination. If you are fine with it then I wouldn't worry. Most indemnity policies are just a way for your conveyancer to make a bit of extra cash. Talking about your conveyancer - what do they advise here? It's there job to know about this sort of stuff and give you the information you need.

jazmalinda

sgun said:

So the trees were gone in 2014. We have had a couple of hot summers and some wet winters since so ground heave would probably be showing by now if it was going to happen. What is your indemnity insurance actually insuring you against? The cost of a couple of saplings and some stump grinding? That's not expensive. You do need to consider though if this was ever enforced would you actually want two horse chestnuts growing that close to your house? They start off slow but when they get going they really do put on height fairly fast. You would be liable to replace them but not liable for any legal issues surrounding their removal.

What are you taking out indemnity insurance for regarding the potential contaminated land? It is extremely unlikely anyone is going to come along and ask all the homeowners to clean up possible contamination. If you are fine with it then I wouldn't worry. Most indemnity policies are just a way for your conveyancer to make a bit of extra cash. Talking about your conveyancer - what do they advise here? It's there job to know about this sort of stuff and give you the information you need.

Still exploring options, haven’t done anything yet

Ashworks

It's extremely unlikely that the Council will enforce after this length of time (I think the legal limit is 3 years, but I'll check)  and you can prove it was not you who breached the TPO so they can't prosecute you. Even if they did enforce replacement, there is no reason at all why they would want you to remove the stumps. If you needed to replant ,you could negotiate the use of a smaller species and plant farther away from the house (replanting doesnt have to be in the exact same location)-- but as i said they are extremely unlikely to enforce this. 

As you cannot be prosecuted the only risk would be the cost of two trees, which is minimal, so no need for insurance. Also no need for a survey as there are no trees!
You could raise this with the sellers and if they did it without permission they could apply retrospectively, (and risk prosecution)  but personally i wouldn't worry.

elsien

We had a dying oak tree cut down with permission from the council. There was a clause about replacing it with something else. There was never any suggestion that the stump should be removed. 
20 years on, no-one has ever checked to see if the tree has been replaced or not - it hasn't. 
Of course if the planning department hadn't given permission to the people before us to put a new build so close to the tree that it was blindingly obvious it would affect the roots and kill it off, the problem wouldn't have arisen in the first place. 

Ashworks

Just checked and the time limit for prosecution is 3 years as I thought:

Section 210(4A) and (4B) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 set out that, in respect of offences under section 210(4) of the Act, authorities may bring an action within 6 months beginning with the date on which evidence sufficient in the opinion of the prosecutor to justify the proceedings came to the prosecutor’s knowledge. However, proceedings cannot commence more than 3 years after the date the offence was committed.

Here is the link: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tree-preservation-orders-and-trees-in-conservation-areas#enforcing-tree-protection-offences

FreeBear

Ashworks said:  there is no reason at all why they would want you to remove the stumps.

Removing the stumps is good practice. Leaving them in place risks stuff like honey fungus taking hold which could affect other trees & shrubs growing nearby. Grinding them out will also give you a nice patch of ground to plant something else.

sgun

FreeBear said:

Ashworks said:  there is no reason at all why they would want you to remove the stumps.

Removing the stumps is good practice. Leaving them in place risks stuff like honey fungus taking hold which could affect other trees & shrubs growing nearby. Grinding them out will also give you a nice patch of ground to plant something else.

Absolutely this. It wouldn't cost more than £200 absolutely max to have them ground out so definitely get it done (although honey fungus would probably have taken hold by now if it was going to, it's not a risk I would take).

Ashworks

I agree, but what I said was that the  Council wouldn't make them remove the stumps.