UKTC Archive

Re: Hidden defects

Subject: Re: Hidden defects
From: AV Arboriculture
Date: Jul 27 2020 16:14:27
Apologies Jerry, I didn't see that. 

Regards, 

Mike Charkow 
Principal Arboriculturist 
______________________ 
Arbor Vitae Arboriculture Ltd 

Planning surveys, Tree inspections, Bats in trees inspections, Arboricultural 
consultancy, Soil de-compaction, Root Investigation, Woodland Management. 

[ mailto:info@xxxxxxx.co.uk | info@xxxxxxx.co.uk ] 
[ https://avtree.co.uk/ | www.avtree.co.uk ] 
07917XXXXXX 
Company Registration Number: SC413171 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "trees" <trees@xxxxxxxxxx.co.uk> 
To: "uktc" <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info> 
Sent: Monday, 27 July, 2020 17:00:46 
Subject: Re: Hidden defects 

I addressed mine to both you and David so I don't see why you should 
feel singled out. 
Also, you'd banged out another couple of one-liners by the time I'd 
formulated and sent my response. 

Enough. 


On 27/07/2020 16:52, AV Arboriculture wrote: 
I agree Jerry; I have stepped down from the disfunctional thread and made 
that clear in my last posts. Can I ask why you are singling me out? 

Regards, 

Mike Charkow 
Principal Arboriculturist 
______________________ 
Arbor Vitae Arboriculture Ltd 

Planning surveys, Tree inspections, Bats in trees inspections, 
Arboricultural consultancy, Soil de-compaction, Root Investigation, 
Woodland Management. 

[ mailto:info@xxxxxxx.co.uk | info@xxxxxxx.co.uk ] 
[ https://avtree.co.uk/ | www.avtree.co.uk ] 
07917XXXXXX 
Company Registration Number: SC413171 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "trees" <trees@xxxxxxxxxx.co.uk> 
To: "uktc" <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info> 
Sent: Monday, 27 July, 2020 16:38:39 
Subject: Re: Hidden defects 

Mike, David, please let's not disappear down this hole again as there 
seems to be no possibility of there being any light at the end of it. 
The subject has been discussed at length previously and as the twain 
seem unlikely to meet, perhaps you should each go your own way. 
I do appreciate that it's an important subject; it's just that it's 
never going to be resolved in this forum. I suggest your views would be 
better aired in something like the Arb Journal, where there's more room 
to expand and less opportunity for things to get over-heated. 

Thanks 
Jerry 


On 27/07/2020 15:16, David Evans wrote: 
<<I'm not sure that there's much need for a discussion on semantics. To my 
mind our job is to look at a tree carefully (inspection) and assess any 
potential defects or symptoms of defects (assessment) to quantify - to the 
best of our ability - the risk. It's all part of the same process. 
However, we do need to find the potential defects in order to be able to 
assess them.>> 

I'm sure there's absolutely nothing I agree with here. 

Thanks. It's been a useful further exploration of what I think is 
risk-averse, hazard-driven thinking that often comes with managing 
secondary risk (the risk of a claim against the 'inspector') with 
hindsight bias. Rather than managing the primary risk (from tree failure) 
which the duty holder is responsible for. It demonstrates why the duty 
holder having a strategy that tells us what 'our job is', is so important. 

Cheers 

Acer Ventura 











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

The UKTC forum is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy and 
Stockholm Tree Pits 
https://www.stockholmtreepits.co.uk 



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

The UKTC forum is supported by Bosky Trees arboricultural consultancy and
Stockholm Tree Pits
https://www.stockholmtreepits.co.uk