Get ranked on Top Tree Sites Supported by the Arborcentre

UKTC Archive

Top 21 Gardening Sites
tree-care.info for tree advice

Re: Offensive behaviour

Subject: Re: Offensive behaviour
From: Andersonarb
Date: Dec 20 2001 08:46:35
In a message dated 18/12/01 17:06:18 GMT Standard Time, treecision@xxxxx.co.uk writes:


The LPA, who do not have SPG in relation to trees and did not see fit to put
a TPO on this high amenity value tree, have allowed development to within 5m
of the stem centre on one side and 7m on another, on the adjacent land.


While in principle I think you're bang to rights Jules, let us consider the scenario thus:

The LA TPO the tree then refuse the builder plannig permission as development will affect the tree.

The builder then goes to the tree owner and says "your tree is devaluing my site therefore you owe me £Xk to compensate me for my financial loss"

The tree owners then go to the LA and say "your TPO has just cost us £Xk, therefore we expect compensation!"

Therefore by ignoring the tree the LA have saved everybody a pile of loot and trouble.

Now I don't like the above one little bit, but if what I think Charles Mynors said a couple of years ago is correct; that is "a neighbour has an absolute right to abate nuisance whether or not a TPO is in force" then I don't think that anyone is going to achieve anything.

There were a lot of dropped jaws when Charles announced that one but I'm sure thats what he said. Anybody else there (Midlands Branch AA meeting) to testify?

Of course if you only have a right to 'abate nuisance' then perhaps there's an argument to be had but my understanding is that if the above is true, then if the famous Leeds City Council v Sun Timber Company had gone to appeal then the Noble wigs would have let em off! (sorry "orf")

It seems to me that devaluing a plot of land is definitely a 'nuisance.'

Maybe the Town Planners have got an unwritten agreement that they always refuse permission on other grounds.

And remember that by definition "you cannot be a nuisance to yourself." Therefore the Planners can refuse permission because of trees on the plot but not because of trees off the plot.

Tricky one; I'd love Charles to get his book published so we can argue the toss about such matters in this forum. (Assuming any of us can afford it; I bet it costs more than Giles Biddle's tome!)

Looking forward to the comments on the above.

Bill.

Current thread