Non-motoring > responsibility for a dangerous tree	Legal Questions
Thread Author: Meldrew	Replies: 37

Sun 8 Sep 13 13:43   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Meldrew

My Partner has a large old and possibly diseased oak tree, growing on the verge of a public lane, outside her property but overhanging it. In the storm of 1986(?) branches fell off it onto her house and the Council came and removed them. Now small branches are falling off the tree, from time to time, onto her drive. The council are now denying any responsibility for the tree and saying that the land has no known ownership. How the verge of a public road cannot have an "owner" escapes me but that is what they say. Additionally, the tree overhangs the road, at the entrance to the local Primary School, where 200+ children come in and out ever school day and could be injured by falling branches. I would appreciate comments on what approach to take with the council. The tree is clearly dangerous and the public and my partner may be at risk from the tree's condition and it must belong to and be the responsibility of somebody. I think the council can't be bothered to take the time and trouble to find out! Reply to this message | Report message

Sun 8 Sep 13 13:52   responsibility for a dangerous tree - madf

If the council deny ownership, write to them threatening to cut it down...but saying that is only due to the risk of it endangering life. and threaten to charge them with the cost... Reply to this message | Report message

Sun 8 Sep 13 14:02   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Falkirk Bairn

Public road/path - Council has duty of care. Write to your MP if nothing positive Reply to this message | Report message

Sun 8 Sep 13 14:03   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Zero

take the fallen branches over to your council office and dump them in the foyer. "Yours I believe" Reply to this message | Report message

Sun 8 Sep 13 14:45   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Ambo

In my area, it is very hard to get anyone out to see the situation on the ground. I find writing to the council with photographs gets action. Rough prints from a computer printer will do. Take from several angles to highlight the problems. Include measurements. Take some of children, preferably small, passing under the overhanging branches, but clear with the head teacher first to avoid a police report. The teacher's support, with perhaps their countersignature on an accompanying letter, should help a lot. I certainly would not advocate felling the tree and then sending the council the bill as they won't pay it and maybe report you for not observing innumerable H & S precautions that should have been taken. Furthermore, there may be a Tree Preservation Order in force and a man living not far from me was recently fined £130,000 for infringing one. If all fails then, since the land belongs to no-one, lay a claim to it. Reply to this message | Report message

Sun 8 Sep 13 14:59   responsibility for a dangerous tree - FocalPoint

"...growing on the verge of a public lane, outside her property but overhanging it." There may well be uncertainty regarding the ownership of what appears to be a verge - there are similar issues relating to properties near where I live. Your partner's deeds (assuming he/she is the property owner) should clarify boundaries. If that is not clear, then, as Ambo says above, enclose the property and assume responsibility for the tree - in my view it would be worth it, to get ownership of an extra bit of land, though you may want to do the maths. (Cost of fence plus cost of making tree safe against the value or usefulness of the extra land.) A final point: if your tree/hedge overhangs a public footway the council has the power to compel you to trim it back. If the land is not required, you have to impress on the council the need for the safety of persons passing along the lane, which I assume is a public right of way. You have the right to trim any branches which overhang your property, unless there is a tree preservation order in place, or you are in a conservation area. Last edited by: FocalPoint on Sun 8 Sep 13 at 15:01 Reply to this message | Report message

Sun 8 Sep 13 16:47   responsibility for a dangerous tree - corax

>> You have the right to trim any branches which overhang your property, >> unless there is a tree preservation order in place, or you are in a conservation >> area. If it is large and old as reported, it may well have a preservation order. Reply to this message | Report message

Sun 8 Sep 13 17:01   responsibility for a dangerous tree - No FM2R

There will be a Arboricultural Officer or similar. Find him and speak to him. The one I deal with is fantastically helpful and frequently causes action. He will also know about regulations and preservation orders. This is Cherwell's approach in case its helpful. www.cherwell.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=4283 If you do decide to take action, write to the council stating your intention and reasons and give them 30 days to object. State that whilst you will be paying this in the first instance due to the urgency and safety issues, you will be pursuing those responsible for reimbursement. Reply to this message | Report message

Sun 8 Sep 13 16:55   responsibility for a dangerous tree - sherlock47

For a pretty definitive answer www.titleandcovenant.co.uk/pdfs/NOV2009Newsletter.pdf Potential loopholes appear to be if there is a ditch on the verge. Although about a different scenario, this link contains some useful pointers. www.gardenlaw.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=15307 Reply to this message | Report message

Sun 8 Sep 13 17:55   responsibility for a dangerous tree - CGNorwich

Why do you think the tree is "clearly dangerous". You mention small branches are falling off the tree but this is a natural process for large trees. Small branches get damaged in the wind and die. I have two 150 year old oaks on my boundary and I am forever picking up pieces of branch and twigs from the lawn. The tree aren't dangerous though and I'm told are good for another 100 years . Is there really a concern about danger or does the tree simply constitute a nuisance as far as twigs and falling leaves are concerned? Has the school ever voiced any concern? Reply to this message | Report message

Sun 8 Sep 13 18:57   responsibility for a dangerous tree - corax

>> I have two 150 year old oaks on my >> boundary and I am forever picking up pieces of branch and twigs from the lawn. >> The tree aren't dangerous though and I'm told are good for another 100 years . Only 100 years CG? We have two lines of oak trees either side of our allotment, at least 600 years old. They are tremendous, a joy to behold - one of them dropped a branch Monday night. It might as well have been a separate tree, such is the size of it. There are currently discussions about whether to remove two of the lower branches that span a long way out from the base of the tree, one side over the cricket ground, the other over someones shed and end of their allotment, and also an access track. We have been told it could take some time as they all have preservation orders on them. Reply to this message | Report message

Sun 8 Sep 13 20:17   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Armel Coussine

We have a dangerous tree, also an oak but a long dead-straight spindly one, pushed over in some not-very-recent tempest, threatening an overhead power line that runs beside our potholed drive. It's a real puzzle trying to work out how to deal with it without disconnecting and removing the power line. Meanwhile, everyone worries about it every time they see it. It's very obvious. Of course if nothing is done it will cut off the power at some maximally inconvenient moment in the dead of winter with rain or sleet as well. Stands to reason. Everyone thinks that gloomily whenever they see the damn thing too. Reply to this message | Report message

Sun 8 Sep 13 20:52   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Fenlander

A few houses away from us they've just faced and resolved the same situation. Our small estate was a grazing field 30yrs ago. The highway boundary was a large unkempt hawthorn hedge growing along small ditch adj to a narrow rough verge beside the single track road. The individual property physical boundaries were post and panel fences just inside the hedge with the Land Registry records aligned with the fence line. Roll on 30yrs and the hedge has grown into trees which threaten foundations and take light from windows of the houses built close to this boundary. The highway authority decided they had no ownership of the verge/dyke/hedge area and no issue with the size of the trees. So the adj house owner had notices produced by their solicitor which declared the trees a nuisance and gave anyone who claimed to own the land/trees a period to make themselves known. A notice was posted on each tree. After the end of the period with no response the house owner had all the hedge and trees removed then extended their boundary to enclose the old hedge line by building a brick wall. I thought the wall a bit risky in case someone popped up with a claim in the future but so far it's worked out. Reply to this message | Report message

Sun 8 Sep 13 22:07   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Haywain

AC, have you reported your concerns to your local Distribution Network Operator? www.energynetworks.org/info/faqs/electricity-distribution-map.html Dangerous trees in domestic situations are taken very seriously if reported, and someone should come out to you and assess the situation. [I spent 6 years recently as a consultant arboriculturalist assessing power-lines and vegetation] Reply to this message | Report message

Sun 8 Sep 13 22:10   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Armel Coussine

Sounds as if we need a visit from you Haywain! Thanks for the suggestion. I will follow it up. Reply to this message | Report message

Sun 8 Sep 13 22:14   responsibility for a dangerous tree - rtj70

One of my brother's houses has some trees nearby. These were/are not deep rooted and he had to pay thousands to get them cut down. The risk was one would go over and flatten his house. Trees technically not his... but this is California. But nobody else was going to sort it out and his house was the risk. (I wonder what survey he did on that!??!?) Chap who sorted it including going up the trees had one arm... other lost in a chainsaw accident. Reply to this message | Report message

Mon 9 Sep 13 10:32   responsibility for a dangerous tree - neiltoo

Call the Power Company, who may deal with it. Most of our local network is overhead, and NORWEB are frequently around trimming trees. Reply to this message | Report message

Sun 8 Sep 13 22:45   responsibility for a dangerous tree - CGNorwich

"Only 100 years CG? We have two lines of oak trees either side of our allotment, at least 600 years old. They are tremendous, a joy to behold - one of them dropped a branch Monday night. It might as well have been a separate tree, such is the size of it." Yes oaks can live for 600 years but most last a couple of hundred years or so. Many of the oldest examples have been coppiced which prolongs their age. My two oaks are part of the old hedge line which I suspect was planted when the land was enclosed early in the nineteenth century. They do cast a lot of shadow although very pleasant to sit under on a hot summers day. That part of the garden is devoted to spring flowers and bulbs which flower before the oak comes into leaf in May. Lots of acorns this years - quite painful when they fall on my bald head! I do curse them at times - especially when I have to clear out the gutters twice a year. Once from the flowers in June and then again from the leaves in January. - A great job in winter, up a ladder scooping handfuls of wet leaves from an ice water filled gutter! Sweeping of leaves is a major job in November and December but it does have its compensations - I make leaf mold. Oak leaves take a long time to break down though because of the tannin which acts as a preservative . I leave them for two years Reply to this message | Report message

Mon 9 Sep 13 08:02   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Crankcase

>> I do curse them at times - especially when I have to clear out the >> gutters twice a year. Why don't you install some of that gutter guard stuff? Plastic mesh that clips on top of the gutter and stops leaves and things getting in at all. Reply to this message | Report message

Mon 9 Sep 13 08:25   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Zero

>> >> >> I do curse them at times - especially when I have to clear out >> the >> >> gutters twice a year. >> >> Why don't you install some of that gutter guard stuff? Plastic mesh that clips on >> top of the gutter and stops leaves and things getting in at all. There is a much better solution. www.hedgehog-gutter-brush.co.uk Reply to this message | Report message

Mon 9 Sep 13 08:30   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Lygonos

May stop the pipes getting clogged but I'd imagine with a couple of juicy oak trees the guards would soon be covered in slimy leaves and still cause the drainage to fail and walls to get soaked in a downpour. Maybe having a guard at the top of each drainpipe would reduce the risk of crud blocking up the verticals. Reply to this message | Report message

Mon 9 Sep 13 08:33   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Zero

the verticals rarely get blocked. Gravity dontcha know. Reply to this message | Report message

Tue 10 Sep 13 07:09   responsibility for a dangerous tree - L'escargot

>> Maybe having a guard at the top of each drainpipe would reduce the risk of >> crud blocking up the verticals. >> I have them to stop sycamore seeds going down the downpipes and germinating out of sight. Reply to this message | Report message

Mon 9 Sep 13 09:26   responsibility for a dangerous tree - CGNorwich

I did fit mesh but then remove it all as more trouble than it was worth. The problem is really the fine debris from the oak flowers in May. That stuff just goes through the mesh and turns into a gutter blocking sludge. In autumn the leaf fall sits in top of the mesh preventing the water from getting into the gutters. I do have some chicken mesh stuffed into the top of the down fall pipes to prevent them getting blocked. We are talking. serious amounts of leaves here and the nearest tree is only 30 feet from the house. Trees are about 60 feet tall. Reply to this message | Report message

Mon 9 Sep 13 11:50   responsibility for a dangerous tree - madf

>> Lots of acorns this years - quite painful when they fall on my bald head! >> >> I do curse them at times - especially when I have to clear out the >> gutters twice a year. Once from the flowers in June and then again from the >> leaves in January. - A great job in winter, up a ladder scooping handfuls of >> wet leaves from an ice water filled gutter! >> >> Sweeping of leaves is a major job in November and December but it does have >> its compensations - I make leaf mold. Oak leaves take a long time to break >> down though because of the tannin which acts as a preservative . I leave them >> for two years >> >> +1 50 x 0.5cubic meters of leaves per year - mainly oak (3 in field adjacent to us blow into garden, one in front lawn) plus various others - apple, cherry, rowan etc.. Gutter cleaning at front - with oak - required 4-5 times a year despite mesh over guttering.. I used to hate heights but I've become so used to running up a 10- 12 meter high ladder I've got used to it. LOTS of compost though. I have three large compost heaps plus two daleks for kitchen waste. Reply to this message | Report message

Mon 9 Sep 13 12:01   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Cliff Pope

If branches are overhanging her property she is entitled to cut them off to the boundary line regardless of who owns the land the tree is growing on or whether it is dangerous or not. She is obliged to offer the trinmmings to the owner, if known. But it may actually be her tree anyway. A frontagor is deemed to own the land to the centre of the road unless there is evidence to the contrary. As I and others said on the garden law forum, that has nothing to do with whether it is all part of the highway or not. Reply to this message | Report message

Tue 10 Sep 13 06:59   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Meldrew

Very many thanks for the wide range of helpful comments, I have been off the net for a long weekend! In summary, the tree is beside the house and outside the boundary fence so frontagor does not apply. As a large branch fell off the tree in 1986 its condition cannot be any better; it is very large and with some obviously dead branches . In fact she had tree surgeons into her back garden, 3 weeks ago, for an exactly similar problem with a vast 6 trunked holly tree, tree outside her property with over hanging branches, and they trimmed off the overhang, shredded it and took it away. They took one look at the oak tree and said it was too dangerous for them to go up it Last edited by: Meldrew on Tue 10 Sep 13 at 07:03 Reply to this message | Report message

Tue 10 Sep 13 08:42   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Cliff Pope

>> outside >> the boundary fence so frontagor does not apply. It might do. That's the point of the explanation in one of those legal links - The freehold boundary is not the same as the actual curtilage boundary that you have absolute rights over. Think of the public highway as like having a public footpath through your garden - you still own it, but you have absolutely no right to obstruct it, and if it is adopted, the highway authority will be responsible for its maintenance and implementation of highway regulations. The highway is not restricted to the metalled road, but includes the verge, possibly up to your garden wall. If the tree is situated on the highway then it is an obstruction, and the responsibility of the HA. But if the council disclaim responsibility as highway, then the land has to belong to someone, and that someone will be you in the absense of evidence to the contrary. I would write to the council claiming ownership, and giving notice that you intend to cut down the tree in a month's time unless they wish to object or offer any proof of ownership. Then see what happens. But start with just the overhanging branches, because you have an absolute right to cut those regardless of ownership. Reply to this message | Report message

Tue 10 Sep 13 09:11   responsibility for a dangerous tree - CGNorwich

"you have an absolute right to cut those regardless of ownership." Unless of course the tree is listed in which case you could be liable for a a very large fine. Reply to this message | Report message

Tue 10 Sep 13 10:11   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Cliff Pope

>> "you have an absolute right to cut those regardless of ownership." >> >> Unless of course the tree is listed in which case you could be liable for >> a a very large fine. >> True, as pointed out by someone previously. But I think you have a right to remove a dangerous branch even from a listed tree. And if you possibly own the tree overhanging a public space you would have an over-riding duty to do so. I don't think you can let a listed building collapse on the public just because you haven't yet received consent to rectify it. Reply to this message | Report message

Tue 10 Sep 13 09:40   responsibility for a dangerous tree - L'escargot

According to www.naturenet.net/trees/tpo.htm, there are exemptions from Tree Preservation Orders, such as "Felling or working on a dead, dying or dangerous tree.". Reply to this message | Report message

Tue 10 Sep 13 09:49   responsibility for a dangerous tree - L'escargot

>> According to www.naturenet.net/trees/tpo.htm, there are exemptions from Tree Preservation Orders, such as "Felling or working on a dead, dying or dangerous tree.". If clicking on the link produces "page not found", try Googling for naturenet:trees Last edited by: L'escargot on Tue 10 Sep 13 at 09:51 Reply to this message | Report message

Tue 10 Sep 13 09:55   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Focusless

>> >> According to www.naturenet.net/trees/tpo.htm, >> >> If clicking on the link produces "page not found", try Googling for naturenet:trees It's because the comma got included in the link - you have to leave a gap before punctuation. www.naturenet.net/trees/tpo.htm Last edited by: Focusless on Tue 10 Sep 13 at 09:55 Reply to this message | Report message

Tue 10 Sep 13 11:39   responsibility for a dangerous tree - L'escargot

>> It's because the comma got included in the link - you have to leave a >> gap before punctuation. >> >> www.naturenet.net/trees/tpo.htm >> Thanks Focusless, I'll be more careful in future. Reply to this message | Report message

Tue 10 Sep 13 12:12   responsibility for a dangerous tree - L'escargot

>> The council are now denying any responsibility for the tree and saying that the land >> has no known ownership. How the verge of a public road cannot have an "owner" >> escapes me but that is what they say. There's lots of land which has no known ownership. The verge outside our property is even more complicated than that. I assume it "belongs" to the county council, but it (and several metres of our front garden) is under the jurisdiction of the local drainage board because of a culverted dyke which runs under our front garden. Our front wall appears to contravene the drainage board's rule that no structures or trees are allowed within 8 metres of the dyke. Strangely, there's a cherry tree (which I assume "belongs" to the council) on the verge which also appears to contravene the rule. However, I don't think that either the wall or the tree will be under threat unless the drainage board ever needs to gain access to the dyke for cleaning purposes. Last edited by: L'escargot on Tue 10 Sep 13 at 12:13 Reply to this message | Report message

Tue 10 Sep 13 12:20   responsibility for a dangerous tree - L'escargot

>> The council are now denying any responsibility for the tree and saying that the land >> has no known ownership. How the verge of a public road cannot have an "owner" >> escapes me but that is what they say. Here's an interesting discussion about the ownership of grass verges. www.gardenlaw.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=15307 Reply to this message | Report message

Tue 10 Sep 13 13:40   responsibility for a dangerous tree - Ambo

I've forgotten the correct term for the practice, but it is quite common in country areas to see that a house owner has "adopted" a grass verge by mowing it, later planting it with dafodills, then establishing a new boundary with large stones, then allowing the original fence to disintegrate. Reply to this message | Report message

Tue 10 Sep 13 13:53   responsibility for a dangerous tree - L'escargot

>> I've forgotten the correct term for the practice, but it is quite common in country >> areas to see that a house owner has "adopted" a grass verge by mowing it, >> later planting it with dafodills, then establishing a new boundary with large stones, then allowing >> the original fence to disintegrate. Putting large stones on the verge close to the road might be looking for trouble if someone's vehicle hits them and it damages the vehicle or whatever. I thought about doing it to stop vehicles being driven over or parked on "our" well-tended verge, but had second thoughts. www.theanswerbank.co.uk/Law/Question1161596.html tinyurl.com/qx5xfcu Last edited by: L'escargot on Tue 10 Sep 13 at 13:58 Reply to this message | Report message