Compensation from tree surgeon

Wotsit123

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Wotsit123 said:

Thank you, that’s why we want to comply with the order but not sure if it means we will have to pay lots of mediation. 

Neighbour is determined to get money off us but it’s more out of spite. This is a woman in her 20s who bought the house a year ago for 500k and has spent the last year extending and renovating it and doesn’t even live in it yet. I don’t think it’s someone who “needs” money. 

There is another forum:

https://legalbeagles.info/forums/

where you might get better advice on the community order.

This:

https://west-midlands.police.uk/your-options/community-resolution#

says:

Once an officer has decided that a Community Resolution would be suitable, under the Victim Code, they will ask the victim how they would prefer the offence to be resolved. There are four possible options, restorative justice, warning and agreement, restoration and rehabilitation. 

Do you know which has been applied to your order? 

Thanks, don’t even know which one was applied, will try to find out. Will post on the forum you suggested, thank you for that. 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Wotsit123 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Wotsit123 said:

Thank you, that’s why we want to comply with the order but not sure if it means we will have to pay lots of mediation. 

Neighbour is determined to get money off us but it’s more out of spite. This is a woman in her 20s who bought the house a year ago for 500k and has spent the last year extending and renovating it and doesn’t even live in it yet. I don’t think it’s someone who “needs” money. 

There is another forum:

https://legalbeagles.info/forums/

where you might get better advice on the community order.

This:

https://west-midlands.police.uk/your-options/community-resolution#

says:

Once an officer has decided that a Community Resolution would be suitable, under the Victim Code, they will ask the victim how they would prefer the offence to be resolved. There are four possible options, restorative justice, warning and agreement, restoration and rehabilitation. 

Do you know which has been applied to your order? 

Thanks, don’t even know which one was applied, will try to find out. Will post on the forum you suggested, thank you for that. 

Keep us updated if you can, it would be interesting to hear what happens  

elsien

Some police really do talk complete cobblers sometimes. Unfortunately the uniform tends to make people think they know what they’re talking about when that isn’t necessarily the case. 

sheramber

Years ago there was court case local to us after a tree  surgeon cut down some  trees that had a preservation order on them.
The  magistrate ruled that the tree surgeon was not to blame as he did what he was asked to do.
The person who employed him to do it was responsible and was ordered to pay the cost of replacing the trees.

lincroft1710

sheramber said:

Years ago there was court case local to us after a tree  surgeon cut down some  trees that had a preservation order on them.
The  magistrate ruled that the tree surgeon was not to blame as he did what he was asked to do.
The person who employed him to do it was responsible and was ordered to pay the cost of replacing the trees.

But in that case the TS was "only obeying orders". In OP's case it seems TS may not have done exactly what he was asked to do

TherealMandM

People aren't liable for the crimes someone else commit just because they hired them and that would be ridiculous if it was the case.
So you think if a lorry driver was convicted for manslaughter while driving the employer would be the one who goes to prison? 

Yes they can be...
 If you pay someone to come and collect your waste and they flytip, your responsible.
Also look up corporate manslaughter.

sheramber

If the company acted in a way that contributed to the accident then they would be liable to prosecution. For example, if they knew the driver was not licensed to drive that type of Lorry  but allowed him to do  so.

Tokmon

matmidgley said:

People aren't liable for the crimes someone else commit just because they hired them and that would be ridiculous if it was the case.
So you think if a lorry driver was convicted for manslaughter while driving the employer would be the one who goes to prison? 

Yes they can be...
 If you pay someone to come and collect your waste and they flytip, your responsible.
Also look up corporate manslaughter.

Well the first result on google says that:

Your business can be prosecuted for the offence of corporate manslaughter if the way in which its activities are managed causes a death through a gross breach of duty of care to the deceased.

So the only way an employer would be prosecuted because their driver committed manslaughter would be if their management caused the death; so the employer would have effectively done something wrong too. Also if i pay someone to flyip my waste and i checked and made sure they were a registered waste carried but they still did it then that's not my fault and i wouldn't be held responsible for that.

steampowered

My goodness Op, you are letting this neighbour walk all over you.

If she asked you to get down on your knees and lick her shoes, would you do that too? 

I don't understand why you are even considering engaging in mediation.  You certainly shouldn't be engaging with the police. The neighbour's trees damaged your fence for goodness sake.

This is not going to end until you either ignore it (i.e. let the neighbour start a court claim if she wants) or a grow a backbone. Tell the neighbour to take it to court and let the judge decide.

Or even better, get on the front foot by issuing your own court claim for the tree surgeon's bill and the cost of repairing your fence. The law of "private nuisance" supports your case.

It is straightforward to issue a small claims track court claim here - and a heck of a lot cheaper than paying hundreds of pounds for a mediation: https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/web/mcol/welcome

Manxman_in_exile

OP - I appreciate this is too late now but the police should never have been involved in this and you should never have agreed to the community resolution order if you feel you are now bound by it.

I've never heard of a CRO before but, from the wording referenced in one of the above posts, it appears to assume as a given that an offence has actually been committed:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Once an officer has decided that a Community Resolution would be suitable, under the Victim Code, they will ask the victim how they would prefer the offence to be resolved.

I think the use of the terms "the victim" and "the offence" are extremely prejudicial, and I would argue that the police's decision to treat this "incident" as a presumed crime and to be worthy of a CRO is wholly inappropriate and an abuse of their powers.

In the first place it is arguable whether any offence at all has been committed, and if one has been committed, then it's been committed by your tree surgeon, not you.  It's accepted law that you can cut back branches etc that overhang your property, the operative term here being "overhang" (so long as you return the cut off branches to them).  I cannot believe that any reputable and professional tree surgeon would not be aware of this (well they certainly should be).  You've employed them as the "professional expert" and it's up to them to ensure they carry out your commission within the law.  And if you ask them to do something illegal (like cause criminal damage to your neighbour's tree) then it's up to them to tell you that they won't do it.  If the tree surgeon has acted wrongly (eg causing criminal damage) it's him the police should be threatening with prosecution, not you.

I think you also say that another police officer (not one of the original ones you dealt with?) confirmed that this was a criminal offence and that you would be liable for it.  Is that correct?  I find that astonishing and just confirms the old adage don't ask a police officer for legal advice - because they don't know the law.

What I would do in your situation ( if eg this happened to a member of my family) is I'd be making a formal complaint against the police officers concerned on the grounds that they had wrongly concluded without any foundation that a criminal offence had been committed and that you had committed it.  Otherwise why get you to sign up to an order accepting that there was "a victim" and "an offence"?  I'd also be complaining that we'd been browbeaten by the police officers concerned into agreeing to it.

Unfortunately I think you should never have agreed to it.  How far you are now bound by it I simply don't know.  My view is that it should never have been issued in the first place and that the police officers who did so were in the wrong - and probably require retraining.

I'm afraid you've got yourself into a bit of a mess here.  If I'd been in your position I'd have offered your neighbour a token sum of about £250 and been willing (grudgingly) to go up to about £400.  If they rejected that I'd have told them to sue me.  And if your neighbour had brought the police in I'd have told them it was a civil dispute between neighbours and to "go away".  If they insisted an offence had been committed, refer them to your tree surgeon.  And you should have told them to put up or shut up on the CRO.  (ie either drop the matter and go away or prosecute you as you are confident you've done nothing wrong)

What you do now I don't know - but spending a grand on mediation via a solicitor to settle something worth no more than a few hundred quid (if that) seems daft to me.  Unfortunately you seem to have agreed to mediation.  Sorry, but it's bonkers.

(NB - Was it a professional tree surgeon you employed or just "a man with a hedge cutter"?

Because that photograph looks a like a really unprofessional job!)

EDIT:  Sorry but you appear a bit of a doormat.  I think you posted earlier that you were negotiating with your neighbour because you were on maternity leave and only had one wage coming in?  Sorry but you should have been telling them to go forth and multiply from the outset if they wouldn't accept £250!