UKTC Archive

RE: occupiers liability [Scanned]

Subject: RE: occupiers liability [Scanned]
From: Howe, Ron
Date: Nov 24 2008 13:21:50
You're absolutely right Edmund and that would be my feelings too. I too
despise the claim culture we live in and feel that everybody should take
a bit more care with their own safety. I was simply trying help Paul by
pointing out the many pitfalls that he might need to consider when
advising his client. I remember the Right to Take Risk case which
referred to the right to take a risk with ones own person, but not with
other people. I remember this well because it affected the way we looked
at playground safety and, because I was present when the exact same
swimming accident happened to a lad at Mercers Park, Merstham, Surrey,
back in the 80s.

As an LPA TO I've been in this dilemma on a number of occasions and
always seek advice from our legal and claims section and, the comments
made to Paul where based upon that advice given to me in the past.
Reasonableness as Jim says, needs to be proportionate. The site
conditions will dictate what is pragmatic. 

A good answer might be the land owner needs to meet the requirements of
his PL insurance. Paul asked was it enough to have signs? Well is it?
Trespass signs or Hazard signs? ... Some years back I did the very same
thing to a big old decaying veteran Hornbeam in Ashtead Park, (put a
notice up saying it was hazardous and all that jazz) and I prayed that
nothing would go wrong. The tree was in a clearing 25m off a surfaced
path and surrounded by mud. It fell over last year (the right way) and
nothing untoward happened.

Ron Howe
Planning Tree Officer
Mole Valley District Council
Pippbrook
Dorking
RH4 1SJ
Direct Tel. 01306 XXX XXX


-----Original Message-----
From: Edmund Hopkins [mailto:Edmund.Hopkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.gov.uk] 
Sent: Mon, 24 November 2008 10:29
To: UK Tree Care
Subject: RE: occupiers liability [Scanned]

This seems to me overly defensive Ron, and a bit depressing really. For
another approach read the review of this area published by Crown Office
Chambers  (Cooper and Antrobus) 2005 entitled "The Right to Take Risk"
and linked in a previous uktc thread, also the Tomlinson v Congleton BC
case which brought some common sense back to matters.

Edmund

Edmund Hopkins
Tree Officer
Planning Services
Nottingham City Council
________________________________________
From: Howe, Ron [Ron.Howe@xxxxxxxxxxx.gov.uk]
Sent: 24 November 2008 09:36
To: UK Tree Care
Subject: RE: occupiers liability [Scanned]

Paul,

I believe the short answer is, that a trespass warning sign is not
enough. Your client, as you know, has a duty of care to ensure that
anyone who might enter their land, legally or not, does not get injured.
If they do, then they could take your client to court. The argument
would be that although they were warned not to trespass, there were no
warnings about the dangers. You must also cater for people that might
not be able to read the signs for whatever reason you can think of ...
the young and careless, old and careless, long sighted, learning
disabled, didn't enter by a sign etc. The best option might be to make
the land inaccessible. Nevertheless, your client would still be liable
if someone broke in and became injured. So a combination of preventing
access and remedial works would be a reasonable combination in
conjunction with signs warning of and at any hazardous structures.

Ron.


Ron Howe
Planning Tree Officer
Mole Valley District Council
Pippbrook
Dorking
RH4 1SJ
Direct Tel. 01306 XXX XXX


-----Original Message-----
From: paul hughes [mailto:paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.co.uk]
Sent: Sat, 22 November 2008 13:50
To: UK Tree Care
Subject: occupiers liability

My client has a woodland with mature trees that are in decline with
ganoderma , HF etc present.
Several people enter the wood uninvited to exercise their dogs bowels
(and legs) but there are clear warnings about trespass in place.
As the estate is an old peoples home with charitable status (including
the woodland) there is little money in the pot for the felling
'necessary'.  I would like to be able to leave those trees deeper into
the wood to a more natural decline dealing with the iffy ones by the
drive and nearby bridle way.
Is a sign about trespass and stating the condition of the trees with a
disclaimer enough to enable us to leave the deeper wood to its own
devices? Or are we still culpable if a trespasser gets squashed?

thanks
Paul


--
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/

______________________________________________________________________

Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to. Save paper.

Visit http://www.molevalley.gov.uk for information about Council
services, online payments and planning information.

This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the
use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you are
not the intended recipient, the E-mail and any files have been
transmitted to you in error and any copying, distribution or other use
of the information contained in them is strictly prohibited.

The Council computer systems may be monitored and communications carried
on them recorded, to secure the effective operation of the system and
for other lawful purposes.




--
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/
Registered to vote yet? Easy as 1 2 3...    
All city households need to register to vote this year and every year -
call us on 0115 XXXXXXX

This e-mail message has been scanned for Viruses and Content and cleared
by NetIQ MailMarshal.

This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
personal views which are not the views of Nottingham City Council unless
specifically stated. 
If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system, do
not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance
on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that Nottingham
City Council monitors e-mails sent or received for the purposes of
ensuring compliance with its policies and procedures.
Further communication will signify your consent to this.
The contents of e-mails sent or received may have to be disclosed if a
relevant request is made under current legislation, such as, but not
limited to, the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Freedom of Information
Act 2000




--
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/

______________________________________________________________________

Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to. Save paper.

Visit http://www.molevalley.gov.uk for information about Council services, 
online payments and planning information.

This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use 
of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you are not the 
intended recipient, the E-mail and any files have been transmitted to you in 
error and any copying, distribution or other use of the information contained 
in them is strictly prohibited.

The Council computer systems may be monitored and communications carried on 
them recorded, to secure the effective operation of the system and for other 
lawful purposes.




-- 
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/