Jangchub wrote:


My neighbor is such a dick he had his entire live oak which is at
lease 500 years old according to an arborist. The canopy of this tree
is 100 feet, a third of which hangs on my property.

When he had them cleaned up professionally he made them stop on the
line where the property ended, so I have a huge tree hanging there
with all that dead stuff . Some people.

Did you offer to pay for the third on your side? Tree
trimming is expensive!

A huge tree is touching my property line but the trunk is on
my side (just barely). Half of it shades my entire front
yard, half of it shades my neighbor's entire front yard.
I.e. we benefit equally from that tree, and we could argue
about whether it's "my tree" or "our tree."

I paid hundreds of dollars to trim my side so I don't get
dead branches falling on my lawn. If he wants to pay the
hundreds more to trim his side too, great, lets just have
the whole tree trimmed and split the cost. But why should I
pay the cost of trimming the part of the tree he alone
benefits from? He is the one in control of that side of the
tree, anyway: a trimmer would have to go on his property,
not mine, to do the work.

But maybe he doesn't value that tree or it's shade, in which
case he won't care what I do or don't do to it.

(This particular tree won't last another ten years anyway,
according to the tree man, which only reinforces the "why
would I spend hundreds of dollars of maintenance that
doesn't affect me?")