Walwal

The bloke who's garden backs onto my back garden pulled me today about my trees. He reckons the roots are at his foundations and he showed me a piece he had dug out. His house is about 5-6 metres away from these trees at the top of my garden. I don't know what my trees are, they were here when I moved in. 1 is a largish conifer, 1 blossoms in the spring (he mentioned cherry, but I've never seen any fruit on it) and the other has leaves similar to the maple leaf on Canada's flag, but I'm not certain if it IS a maple. Great gardener me, eh??

He says he's spoke to the council, and they've said the only way to protect his founds is to cut down the offending trees and poison the stumps. Now I haven't got any idea how much this is going to cost. Also, I don't know if it's true that the roots are threatening his property. Last year he asked me if I would trim down the maple like one as it was blocking some light from his garden in the mornings. I did this without question. Now I'm wondering whether he's just invented this story about the roots to get all 3 trees felled in one go so he gets more sun.

I'm going to ring a couple of places to get them to give me estimates. Should I get them to go and inspect any damage he reckons he's found?? Can I legally do that??

I don't really want to cut them down unless I've got to, the blossom one looks really nice in spring with all the flowers on, and I especially don't like some other b@stard redesigning my garden just so he can get sun all morning.

Might cut them down then plant a row of leylandii just to p1ss him off.

Any idea's??

Cheers,

Andy.

Jerome

The roots only extend as far as the canopy. If you cut back the canopy, the roots stop growing outwards.

If the canopy of the tree in question is not overhanging his house, the roots can't be in his foundations.

Kieran_Burns

iTrader: (1)

The problem with the Conifer is that it can suck all the moisture out of the soil near his house and cause subsidence. My Mum had to get her new neighbour to chop down his conifer hedge for just this reason... there is a minimum distance that conifers should be to a house...

So he may well be right

Walwal

The canopy is nowhere near his house on any of them.

I read on a website safe distances for buildings, roads etc from trees, but as I don't know what I've got, I can't use their chart. Some trees mentioned 40m!!!!

I think he's coming the game, but I'll phone someone tomorrow and ask them to come out and look at the situation.

Not cutting them down if I don't have to.

Kieran, he reckons it's the tree that blossoms that is the problem. Coincidentally, that's the one that stops the most sun getting to his garden. Surprise surprise.

Thanks,

Andy.

JoanUK300

We have a similar problem only the tree in question is a conker tree, it is HUGE, it is taller than the house and you cannot see the house behind the tree, this tree is in the neighbours garden over the back to us......HOWEVER, I have phoned the council and they have been to see the person whose house and tree it is, BUT they will not do anything about it as the woman says "she loves her trees".
The council said it was up to the owner of the property to maintain the trees, the next step is to go to court and get an injunction, to have the trees trimmed, which they don`t really want to do as it starts costing then and councils do not like to spend money do they!!!!

I would phone your local council and ask them their opinion....then you will get an answer as to if it is a problem or not, from our experience I don`t think your trees ARE a problem, just your neighbour getting a bit OTT about the trees.

Joan.

fast bloke

I would speak to the guy and ask him if the issue is really about light. If so you could let him cut them down at his expense and you can plant something smaller. If he maintains it is about the foundations, ask him to give you a surveyors report showing that this is the case and that it is causing problems.

(I pulled out a smallish tree from the front garden last year - think it might have been cherry - pink blossoms all over the show. The roots went out about 10-12 feet in every direction, even though the tree has never been more than about 8 ft tall with a canopy about 5 or 6 feet across, so he might be telling the truth)

ariel

Speaking as someone who has just this situation but from my own trees I believe that you can take him seriously. I have had a surveyor, who sent for the ground surveyors who took soil samples from 4 feet down plus an aborculturist survey. These guys now send these surveys to the engineers for their decision.
Let me tell you it is not cheap or quick!
Next I await the tree sugeons to do the climbing bit and take down 4 trees at least.
Not to mention the drains full of roots that appear to need attention...

Brendan Hughes

Blossoming one might be a prunus - sort of little maroon leaves generally, or big green ones I think for a cherry? Prunus sends out loads of suckers, so you get hundreds of the little buggers springing up all around under the canopy. I've only seen small ones (15ft high) and I'd be surprised if they smashed paving at that stage. It's a fruit tree, they're not famous for huge old roots.

Not sure if it's true that roots will retract if the canopy is cut. It's a general guide to look at a tree, that if its canopy is wide, its roots will be wide (eg oak, beech) and if canopy is narrow then roots will be narrow (eg conifer).

If you have a digicam, photo the tree shape generally, a close-up of the leaf, and a close-up of the bark and post it, and we'll all try to ID it

MooseRacer

Untrue.

speedking

This website makes sense.

http://www.gardenlaw.co.uk/trees.html

As your roots are trespassing on his land, he could chop through them. This would harm the trees and make them more likely to fall into your property. You will ultimately be responsible for any damage that might occur to his property. Are you prepared to take the risk? Better to try and reach an equitable conclusion.

The table is pretty clear and shows that only very few small trees should be planted within 6m of a house. Even the alternative less cautious distances are generally >6m. The soil type and drainage also has an effect, but if I was in his position I wouldn't be happy.

Walwal

Going to get onto the local council and see if someone will come out to have a look. If they are threatening his house, I'll cut them down, no problem, once I've got proof. If not, they stay, at least for now, and he'll just have to lump it I'm afraid.

Thanks,

Andy.

unclebuck

That's a very useful little site. Cheers.

UB

r32

Hey be a good neighbour, put yourself in his place. Would you be happy? Roots can spread past the canopy, some trees put roots down but others, like cherry can put them out for a long way.
I recently cut down and removed a cherry tree and the roots spread twice as far as the canopy did.

Ringpeas

How would you like it if someone placed something in the way of the sun and your house?
I have had this with the neighbours conifers, they blocked out all the sun for most of the day and killed all plants and grass that grew near them. Luckily they put their house up for sale, he then did not mind me chopping them down myself (damned hard work mind).
It totally transformed my garden.

Nexuas

The whole tree issue bemuses me slightly, other than some of the fast growing conifers most trees grow at a fairly sedate pace (Correct me if I am wrong) Moaning about a 30 or forty year old tree, is fairly pointless as in most cases the tree was probably there when they brought the house. If you don't like trees on your next doors property then do not buy the house, fairly simple????

I used to live in a house that had 6 fir trees in the back garden and one in the front, most of the other houses in the row had 3 or more trees in each garden, people would buy the houses then moan to the council about the trees and some how got the council to come and take the trees down. I am sure the trees were there before the houses were built, at one point I had three nieghbours telling me to phone the council to have all my trees taken down as it was stopping there grass from growing. In the end we moved house and so I am sure the new owners will have been starigth on the phone to the counci to get the trees taken out

Leave trees alone, and let them do what they are good at, creating oxygen...

And no I am not a tree hugger, just think we should let the trees live.

Walwal

Council are going to send someone out to have a look at the situation, but the bloke our lass spoke to said it's almost impossible to prove which roots are from which tree (unless mine are the only trees around, which they're not).

I think I'll get rid of them anyway, no matter what the council say, the thing that annoys me is the neighbour forcing me to redesign the garden. Just don't want to be liable for any damage to his founds.

But I couldn't care 2 f**ks about how much light he gets/doesn't get in his garden. Just my opinion. Once the sun gets past 12 o'clock, the shadow of his house starts to cut across his garden anyway.

Andy.

Jerome

Thank you for your eloquent and detailed refuting of my post.

When I bought a house many years ago, there was a protected tree in my front garden near to the house. I had to get permission from the council to get the tree trimmed. The tree expert at the council told me the above info, so forgive me for being duped into thinking he knew what he was talking about.

MooseRacer

Consider yourself forgiven Jerome

I'll elaborate and say it's not always true

Pete (ex tree surgeon)