UKTC Archive

Re: Subsidence where foundations less than 300mm deep

Subject: Re: Subsidence where foundations less than 300mm deep
From: Liam McKarry
Date: Sep 08 2020 18:47:19
Sorry Jerry I don’t agree - the cost of increased numbers of insurance claims 
is met by premium prices going up; it’s a cost met by customers.

Liam McKarry
Arboricultural Officer (Planning)
01206 XXXXXX
________________________________
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info <uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info> 
on behalf of Jerry Ross <trees@xxxxxxxxxx.co.uk>
Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2020 7:34:27 PM
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: Re: Subsidence where foundations less than 300mm deep

This message originated Externally. Do not click links or open attachments 
unless you recognise the sender, were expecting it and know that the content 
is safe.

"we demonise the insurance industry for trying to minimise the cost to
their customer"


Delete 'customer'; substitute 'shareholder'.

From my mobile
On 8 September 2020 18:43:44 Liam McKarry <Liam.McKarry@xxxxxxxxxxx.gov.uk>
wrote:

Bill,

It’s merely a statement of how things are as per case law.

Even if the foundation is not deep enough, in the absence of tree roots
would the damage occur is one of the first questions asked. I’m unaware
that anyone has ever successfully challenged it in law and therefore,
however illogical it is, we just have to deal with it.

Subsidence is a divisive subject that as an industry we get ourselves in
knots over (unnecessarily in my opinion) and have never really understood
that at the bottom of this is usually a person who just wants their house
fixed and  (how much flak will I get for that one!)



Liam McKarry
Arboricultural Officer (Planning)
01206 XXXXXX
________________________________
From: uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info 
<uktc-request@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
on behalf of Bill Anderson <anderson.arb.original@xxxxxx.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2020 6:18:40 PM
To: UK Tree Care <uktc@xxxxxx.tree-care.info>
Subject: Re: Subsidence where foundations less than 300mm deep

This message originated Externally. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognise the sender, were expecting it and know that the
content is safe.

"Whether we like it or not inadequate foundations is rarely a good defence
if the property is on a clay soil with a cyclical pattern of movement"

I don't see any logic in this statement Liam; why bother with foundations
at all? If the foundation is not adequate for the soil type, doesn't meet
spec, (specification) it's not really fair to even call it a foundation.
However if the foundation does meet the spec and still moves then yes
remove the tree, and hope that another one doesn't grow. Notwithstanding
the fact that if the foundation meets spec and still the building cracks
then the spec must have been wrong.

I'm not saying your quotation isn't an accurate summary of what happens,
just that it's not really logical, and certainly not fair. Jerry has summed
it up really eloquently in my opinion.



--
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
This email, and any attachment, is solely for the intended recipient(s). If
you have received it in error, you must not take any action based upon it,
or forward, copy or show it to anyone; please notify the sender, then
permanently delete it and any attachments. Any views or opinions expressed
are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of
Colchester Borough Council. Although the Council has taken reasonable
precautions to ensure there are no viruses in this email, the Council
cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage arising from this email
or attachments. The Council takes the management of personal data seriously
and it does this in compliance with data protection legislation. For
information about how personal data is used and stored, please go to
www.colchester.gov.uk/privacy<http://www.colchester.gov.uk/privacy>.



--
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
This email, and any attachment, is solely for the intended recipient(s). If 
you have received it in error, you must not take any action based upon it, or 
forward, copy or show it to anyone; please notify the sender, then 
permanently delete it and any attachments. Any views or opinions expressed 
are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of 
Colchester Borough Council. Although the Council has taken reasonable 
precautions to ensure there are no viruses in this email, the Council cannot 
accept responsibility for any loss or damage arising from this email or 
attachments. The Council takes the management of personal data seriously and 
it does this in compliance with data protection legislation. For information 
about how personal data is used and stored, please go to 
www.colchester.gov.uk/privacy.



-- 
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