Tree-destroying neighbour

desthemoaner

Evening all...asking for a friend, honestly. 

My friend owns a detached bungalow and has a large, landscaped garden. In one corner of the garden is--or rather was--a 5m high laurel tree, the trunk of which is on her land. She's recently acquired new neighbours, who have bought the property that borders the part of the garden where this laurel tree grows. She went out for a few hours the other day, and when she came back her neighbour had cut back the branches of the laurel that overhang his garden. But not only that: he'd either leaned over the fence or actually gone into her garden and used a chainsaw to reduce the laurel to a crudely-sawn stump. She's told him that he had no right to do that, and he's shot back that her shed is too near the fence and should be 2m away. Which AFAIK is rubbish, because its not a permanent structure.

However, the main issue is the tree. In my opinion her neighbour has committed criminal damage by trespassing on her land and destroying her tree. Am I right?

PHK

This isn't really a Consumer Rights question. Perhaps one for a property lawyer. 

daveyjp

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/48/contents

Loza2016

My mums neighbour has just had something very similar happen. She has notified the police who are now investigating as it is criminal damage. 

Aylesbury_Duck

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation, your friend needs to consider her course of action.  The tree can't be replaced like-for-like, so what's her preferred outcome?  A difficult ongoing relationship with a neighbour can be mentally and fiscally expensive.  Is it worth demanding compensation or involving the police?  Only your friend can decide that.

The neighbour was entitled to cut back overhanging growth, and technically he should have offered your friend the cuttings before disposing of them.  He wasn't entitled to enter her property, nor to cut anything on her property.

Veteransaver

Your friend should really have made sure her branches weren't overhanging the neighbour in the first place.
Maybe the neighbour was fed up with them or had asked for them to be cut back before, so took more drastic action?

david29dpo

To answer your question, Yes you are right.
What you do about it is another matter.

Dustyevsky

Aylesbury_Duck said:

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation, your friend needs to consider her course of action.  The tree can't be replaced like-for-like....

Oh, but it can! It will begin to renew itself very soon. Laurel regenerates, even from a stump.

Disregarding the rights and wrongs, a laurel isn't like many shrubs, and won't be disfigured in the long-term.

The neighbour has behaved antisocially, but depending on the size of the neighbour's garden, the exact positioning  etc, growing a 5m, light robbing, vigorous evergreen on the boundary could also be disrespectful.

As for the shed, being a temporary structure doesn't mean there are no planning rules to follow. If it exceeds 2.5m in height, it should be 2m from the boundary.

The neighbour is trying to assert themselves aggressively, so it's important to draw a line in the sand. This need not be by involving the police, or potentially having the neighbour open cans of worms with the local authority. It all depends on the negotiating skills of your friend and previous contact. For whatever reason, it seems the neighbour didn't consider a request to lower or cut back the laurel would be met with a positive response. The adage,  "It's often easier to ask for forgiveness than permission." seems to apply.

desthemoaner

Thanks all for the replies, very helpful. First and foremost, I wasn't sure where to put this thread, hence opting for "consumer questions". I could relocate it, but I think the answers given are helpful enough to render that unnecessary. 

The neighbour--or someone acting on his behalf--removed most of the overhanging laurel branches last year, and my friend didn't complain about it at the time, as far as I'm aware.  However, this recent action is "action too far", as he's decided to either enter, or lean over into her property and damage her tree. She's aware that laurel will grow back, so the issue isn't so much the consequences of his action, but the act of entering her property to cause that damage.

I think she's aware that a protracted and bitter dispute with her neighbour will benefit nobody, and is hoping to draw a line where the situation currently rests, given that the tree will grow back. However, she wanted to know her rights in case the neighbour has designs on further damage, and therefore, although its handy to know that he probably has committed criminal damage, she's unlikely to pursue the avenue of legal action further UNLESS he repeats his incursions in some other way.

I'm pretty sure that her shed is only small--she mentioned a figure of 90cm, though I'm not sure whether that's height, width or whatever-- and its my belief that he complained about its proximity to the boundary fence simply in an attempt to distract attention from his own actions. 

As things stand and if I understand the above replies correctly, if he does illegally enter her property again she can threaten him with legal action. We both hope that such a course of action won't be necessary.

Thanks again for all the responses. 

desthemoaner

 Just to add a further angle to the situation that I forgot to mention. He's intending to remove the basic fence in that part of the garden and replace it with panels to match the rest of the boundary on that side. His removal of the tree was obviously intended to facilitate the erection of the new fence, but he made no attempt to approach my friend, discuss the situation and ask for her consent before cutting down the tree and removing the fence. I haven't discussed this with my friend, but it may well be that if he'd approached her in a courteous and neighbourly manner she would have agreed to allow him to replace the fence and remove some of the laurel tree to make that possible. However, he chose not to talk to her about it and in fact during the conversation about the damage to the tree, he suggested that she should contribute to the cost. Given the way things are at present, she's no intention of doing so. 

Undervalued

desthemoaner said:

Thanks all for the replies, very helpful. First and foremost, I wasn't sure where to put this thread, hence opting for "consumer questions". I could relocate it, but I think the answers given are helpful enough to render that unnecessary. 

The neighbour--or someone acting on his behalf--removed most of the overhanging laurel branches last year, and my friend didn't complain about it at the time, as far as I'm aware.  However, this recent action is "action too far", as he's decided to either enter, or lean over into her property and damage her tree. She's aware that laurel will grow back, so the issue isn't so much the consequences of his action, but the act of entering her property to cause that damage.

I think she's aware that a protracted and bitter dispute with her neighbour will benefit nobody, and is hoping to draw a line where the situation currently rests, given that the tree will grow back. However, she wanted to know her rights in case the neighbour has designs on further damage, and therefore, although its handy to know that he probably has committed criminal damage, she's unlikely to pursue the avenue of legal action further UNLESS he repeats his incursions in some other way.

I'm pretty sure that her shed is only small--she mentioned a figure of 90cm, though I'm not sure whether that's height, width or whatever-- and its my belief that he complained about its proximity to the boundary fence simply in an attempt to distract attention from his own actions. 

As things stand and if I understand the above replies correctly, if he does illegally enter her property again she can threaten him with legal action. We both hope that such a course of action won't be necessary.

Thanks again for all the responses. 

Only if he causes some damage or commits some other offence. Otherwise, if only "trespassing" she can ask him to leave and, if necessary use the minimum force to remove him but that is all. If he does it repeatedly she may be able to get a injunction issued. If so then breaching it would be a criminal offence.

Also, as I understand it he has a right to cut off any branches overhanging his boundary providing he does it from his side and offers her the wood which remains her property. He does not have a right to cut any part of the tree that is on her side of the fence, that could be criminal damage.