UKTC Archive

I agree with you Glyn.  What we can do with the information or opinions is 
the key.  I think we can confidently say that notwithstanding the exceptional 
cases and surprises, root damage is not a good thing.  The bonds and the 
penalties need to be structured as being triggered by violations of plan or 
approval.  "You agreed not to do X and to definitely do Y, you violated, you 
pay.  Period."  Value loss might best be an additional set of damages.

SC
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Glyn Thomas 
  To: UK Tree Care 
  Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 4:37 AM
  Subject: RE: FW: Damaged roots and successful prosecution


  <<In this instance I would expect the Beak to see the thing at face
  value not with an Arb's experience, but the point about the case
  probably taking years to reach the court and for the tree to be still
  standing is well made....>>

  The key issue for me, in this case is what sort of prosecution could be
  pursued and what would the evidential test be?  With reference to the
  previous postings you might be able to present a decent 'on the balance
  of probabilities' case, but proving 'beyond reasonable doubt' would
  probably be much more problematic.

  Glyn


  -- 
  The UK Tree Care mailing list
  To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

  The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre
  http://www.arborcentre.co.uk/



-- 
The UK Tree Care mailing list
To unsubscribe send mailto:uktc-unsubscribe@xxxxxx.tree-care.info

The UKTC is supported by The Arbor Centre
http://www.arborcentre.co.uk/