"Jeff Layman" wrote ...

, 'Mike' wrote:
(See OP for details)

As something which might affect any of us, your post led me to looking up
the law behind TPOs (or at least a summary of it). For those who might be
interested, see these downloadable documents:
(http://www.communities.gov.uk/docume.../tposguide.pdf)
(http://www.communities.gov.uk/docume...deaddendum.pdf)

After a quick look at the basic information, your tale reflects the basics
quite well. But in a way it is even worse:
"A tree preservation order is an order made by a local planning authority
in respect of trees or woodlands."

That's pretty clear, you would think. Except that neither "tree" nor
"woodland" are defined in the original legislation! But in the helpful way
that our courts clarify things, "... for the purposes of the TPO
legislation, the High Court has held that a 'tree' is anything which
ordinarily one would call a tree." I wonder if that would include a
bonsai? ;-)

And as regards your point concerning saplings, "Neither does the Act define
the term 'woodland'. In the Secretary of State's view, trees which are
planted or grow naturally within the woodland area after the TPO is made
are also protected by the TPO".

The TPO guide in the first link above runs to 100+ pages. I hear it's
going to rain for the next day or two; what else are you going to read?!


It's the law but if it's not enforced it's nothing. Rich man near here
bought an oak copse with total TPOs for peanuts and immediately felled all
the mature old oak trees and sold them, making a large profit, nothing was
done.
He then blackmailed the neighbours to buy the land at a very inflated price.
--
Regards. Bob Hobden.
Posted to this Newsgroup from the W of London, UK