Council CuntsStallion Explosion writes "I was in a record shop in Melbourne, flicking through the vinyl, when I found a record entitled 'Hackney Council Are A Bunch Of Cunts'"
We agree.
Have you been trapped in the relentless petty minded bureaucracy of your local council?
Why does it require 3 forms of ID to get a parking permit when the car in question is busy receiving a parking ticket right outside the parking office?
Or do you work for Hackney Council?
(
chthonic, Thu 26 Jul 2007, 10:51)
« Go Back
wellthere's lots and lots of legal shit. but the very basic position (no liability accepted for reading this, esp if you die of boredom):
A tree belongs to the owner of the land on which it grows even if its branches or roots go over or under adjoining land. This includes the branches and the fruit of any tree or shrub. This even applies to windfall apples etc.
Roots that grow from land onto a neighbour's are trespassing. The neighbour can chop the roots along the boundary line without permission (although if he damages the tree this is a different issue).
Roots can often lead to substantial damages:
1. The cost of repairs
2. The reduction in the value of the house
3. Any other expenses directly arising
4. Probably the legal costs of the person who has suffered the damage.
5. An order by the court that the owner of the tree cuts back the branches or the roots or takes down the tree itself.
Subsidence/damage caused by tree roots will involve a claim, which will generally be a nuisance rather than trespass if it has to go to Court. Naturally a negotiated agreement with neighbours would be far preferable.
For the Council to succeed:
1. As Claimant, it must be an owner of the land affected. This would usually mean that they must either own the freehold or have leasehold of the land.
2. The person alleged to commit the nuisance (the Defendant) should be in occupation of the land from which the roots grow because he has to be in a position to abate the nuisance. This is the crucial point for Pooflake, unless the tree is on his land or land of which he is a co-owner such as shared garden.
3. Unlike trespass where damage is not necessary the Council must be able to prove that damage has already been caused to its property.
4. A reasonable person in the position of the Defendant must be able to have foreseen that damage would be caused by the roots.
Insurance Companies will often say that a building is old and that that is the reason for the damage. They might even argue that the house should not have been built so near to trees. Neither of these arguments is a strong one.
(
rachelswipe with a fork, Tue 31 Jul 2007, 17:35,
Reply)
« Go Back