Next door neighbours trees

lozzy84

Hi all
Looking for a bit of advice, we bought our house last year and the next door neighbours trees were hitting the roof so I asked them recently if they could cut them down a bit as they were in excess of 45ft high and we're dangerous. Last Saturday they got someone in to cut some of them down, not them all but the ones that were physically touching the house. He rang me the day before and asked if there was a problem if they had to come onto my land with the cherry picker and I said work away whatever has to be done has to be done. So I get home from work and the wife shows me the mess they've left behind massive branches and the place in bits, a drainage pipe broken and a branch after hitting our new Windows thankfully no damage done to it, my question is, is it not up to either the tree surgeon or the home owner to get rid of the branches. There's a good trailer load of stuff to be taken away, and also is it not up to him to replace the boundary with something I have rang him and he's to ignorant to ring me back, the house is rented and it's the owner that I have been dealing with so throwing it back into his garden is not an option but I would put it into his own house if I could get away with it.
Thanks in advance

Sam Kade

If the branches are on your side of the boundary it's your job to dispose of them, he wasn't under any obligation to cut them for you.

Sam Kade

Sam Kade wrote: »

If the branches are on your side of the boundary it's your job to dispose of them, he wasn't under any obligation to cut them for you.

I dont think this is correct.

SCOOP 64

Surely if it was the neighbours tree over hanging ops garden and hitting his house roof the neighbour is responsible for it?

lozzy84

I have read numerous times on different websites that I could cut any branches overhanging onto my property but I must return them to his land as they are his property

Sam Kade

BrownFinger wrote: »

I dont think this is correct.

As a landowner I can tell you that it is correct, plenty threads on boards about the same.

http://treecouncil.ie/tree-advice/trees-law/

Oldtree

The trees clearly belong to your neighbor.

You had the right to prune the overhanging tree branches back to directly above the boundary, so long as that pruning did not lead to the demise of the trees.

Should you have pruned the trees you are obliged to offer the prunings back to the neighbor, as the prunings are their property.

Should the neighbor remove the trees. or get the work done, and leave leavings/brash/branches in your garden then he has to remove it, again they are his property/rubbish.

Why is it not an option to throw the branches back over the wall?

Its difficult to prove damage to the drain pipe unless your wife saw it happening.

What do you mean by "place in bits"?

Your neighbour may have gotten uninsured cowboys in, as I know of no professional tree surgeon/arborist that would leave a mess, esp in a neighbors garden and who would not own up immediately to any damage caused to the neighbors house.

Sam Kade

Sam Kade wrote: »

As a landowner I can tell you that it is correct, plenty threads on boards about the same.

http://treecouncil.ie/tree-advice/trees-law/

Oh sorry I didnt know you were a land owner,my apologies .

So you are saying if someone cut down their tress and left them on your land you would be happy to dispose of them ?
Its would be the same as dumping.You are wrong.

As a land owner I can tell you that you are a fool.

Sam Kade

BrownFinger wrote: »

Oh sorry I didnt know you were a land owner,my apologies .

So you are saying if someone cut down their tress and left them on your land you would be happy to dispose of them ?
Its would be the same as dumping.You are wrong.

As a land owner I can tell you that you are a fool.

If you are as incapable of reading the link as the posting rules I will forgive your last sentence. The op allowed his neighbour in to cut back the branches on his side of the boundary. He can offer the branches back to his neighbour but if his neighbour doesn't want them he'll have to dispose of them himself, it's all there in the link if you care to read it :rolleyes:

magicbastarder

the scenario you are referencing is where the person whose property the trees overhang has cut the overhanging branches back, and the law is stated on the disposal of these.

the scenario being discussed here is where the *owner* of the trees has cut his *own* trees back and left piles of cuttings in the neighbour's garden - a scenario which is *not* there in the link you provided.

Sam Kade

magicbastarder wrote: »

the scenario you are referencing is where the person whose property the trees overhang has cut the overhanging branches back, and the law is stated on the disposal of these.

the scenario being discussed here is where the *owner* of the trees has cut his *own* trees back and left piles of cuttings in the neighbour's garden - a scenario which is *not* there in the link you provided.

He was asked to cut them back, big difference.

magicbastarder

that's not mentioned in the link which you have carefully provided.

Oldtree

Sam Kade wrote: »

He was asked to cut them back, big difference.

No difference. neighbors property/rubbish remains the neighbors property and needs to be removed, unless the op specifically said to the tree owning neighbor that they could leave the prunings there, which I doubt very much in this case!

Did the neighbor ask for a sharing of the cost?

Shefwedfan

Not 100% sure if this is correct but let me start

So I bought house, part of garden overgrown tree where in my garden but over hanging into neighbours
Other part the neighbour had cut the tree to the trunk and all that was left was branch's which grew into my garden.

In regards to the tree on my property. I cut them down, the branch's that hung into the neighbours garden I offered anything that was useful to them. They didn't want them so I kept. I disposed of all of the cutting etc

The tree's that overhung into my garden. I approached the neighbour, told them I was losing about 5ft of my garden and I would have to cut them back, but because they had done the same on there side the tree's would probably die. So I offered to cut them down altogether.

They didn't want that but wanted a row of stumps at the same height. So I did this. All of the decent bits of wood I cut into large logs and gave to them. The waste I disposed of. I didn't cut them into fire sized logs as this would have added another half a day of work....they have them stacked away but I know I will end up having to offer to cut them up for them.....

Not sure if that makes sense, it ended up anyway we are all talking at the end of it :-)

To the OP I think you should have cut back the tree's yourself but went into the neighbour first and explained what you where going to do. I would guess you could have come to some agreement which would have worked for everyone. Did you notice the overgrown tree before you bought the house? Could you not have requested the previous owner to resolve the issue before buying the house? I was fully aware of the issue I had before I bought the house.......

It was not your neighbours fault the previous owner did not tend to the tree's as they should have.....

Oldtree

The tree and any branches that overhang a neighbour are the tree owners responsibility. The tree owner should maintain their tree giving consideration to their neighbour. The same would apply to a hedge.

Being a good neighbour is all about the right tree being planted in the first place.

Yes it is important to talk to your neighbour and maintain relations and that works both ways.

If it is not your tree or its a possibility your pruning will kill the tree, talk to the tree owner first. If you remove more than a third of a tree it is possible for the "shock" to kill the tree.

And yes you are right "buyer beware"

recedite

I think that once the owner of the tree agreed to do the job, he became responsible for any damage done and for removing the debris.

The moral of the story is that he should not have agreed to do it. He could have said "I'm not going to do it, but you can if you want, and I don't want the branches back". This is similar to the idea that you should never try to fill in a pothole or fix something outside your own property. Once you do that, you become personally responsible, even though you might be only trying to help others.

On the other hand if nobody pruned the tree, then the tree owner could potentially be sued if the branches came down in a storm and damaged the neighbour's property.

BTW I advise anyone in this situation not to ask your home insurance company whether you are covered for a dodgy overhanging tree. Once the risk has been identified (ie by you phoning them and telling them about it) they can simply tell you that as a known risk it needs to be removed, and therefore neither the potential damage, nor the cost of prevention/removal, will be covered by the insurance.

seagull

Any damage to your property should be billed back to whoever was doing the job. I would expect the branches to have been removed in a case like this, or at the very least to be told ahead of time that they would be left.