Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #16   Report Post  
Old 01-12-2008, 07:41 AM posted to aus.gardens,aus.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Nov 2008
Posts: 5
Default compelling neighbour to remove dangerous tree

On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 16:17:08 +1100, "Peter Jason"
wrote:

snipped

I would suggest you offer to pay 1/2 the tree removal costs,
and failing results there, offer to pay all the costs.
It's all very sad, but there's no other way. Note too that
will build credit with the neighbour, and keep money out of
lawyer's pockets.


It's not all very sad. There is another way - the 2006 Act.

If the Land and Environment court finds in our favour then failure to
remove the tree incurs a fine of up to $100,000 (or thereabouts - I
don't have the act in front of me).

No point in trying to build credit with the neighbour from Hell.

BTW, in case you think I might also be the neighbour from Hell then
let me say that I consider all my other neighbours to be from Heaven.

It is because of my hellish neighbour's recalcitrance over the years
that my friend could have been killed, but mercifully was only
hospitalised with a 'boggy patch' on top of the skull - that's what
casualty called it, before sending her off by ambulance for a CAT
scan.

Because the tree is massive, dangerous and hemmed in by houses and
yards, the cost for removal is going to run into thousands. I would
rather pay lawyers than practice self help.
  #17   Report Post  
Old 01-12-2008, 08:08 AM posted to aus.gardens,aus.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Nov 2006
Posts: 72
Default compelling neighbour to remove dangerous tree


wrote in message
...
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 16:17:08 +1100, "Peter Jason"

wrote:

snipped

I would suggest you offer to pay 1/2 the tree removal
costs,
and failing results there, offer to pay all the costs.
It's all very sad, but there's no other way. Note too
that
will build credit with the neighbour, and keep money out
of
lawyer's pockets.


It's not all very sad. There is another way - the 2006
Act.

If the Land and Environment court finds in our favour then
failure to
remove the tree incurs a fine of up to $100,000 (or
thereabouts - I
don't have the act in front of me).

No point in trying to build credit with the neighbour from
Hell.

BTW, in case you think I might also be the neighbour from
Hell then
let me say that I consider all my other neighbours to be
from Heaven.

It is because of my hellish neighbour's recalcitrance over
the years
that my friend could have been killed, but mercifully was
only
hospitalised with a 'boggy patch' on top of the skull -
that's what
casualty called it, before sending her off by ambulance
for a CAT
scan.

Because the tree is massive, dangerous and hemmed in by
houses and
yards, the cost for removal is going to run into
thousands. I would
rather pay lawyers than practice self help.




Then do so; but try and get one who has had *specific*
experience with trees and neighbours and there are court
records detailing the experience of others.
http://www.rurallaw.org.au/handbook/xml/
http://www.access.prov.vic.gov.au/pu...OVguide016.jsp
http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/si...and%20easement
http://www.austlii.edu.au/forms/search1.html?&

Not all lawyers are created equal, and be sure you don't get
stuck with a legal university student.
Get a quote from the lawyer (NOT an "estimate"),
or,preferably, do the no-win-no-fee thing.

I have survived to tell thee.



  #18   Report Post  
Old 01-12-2008, 08:27 AM posted to aus.gardens,aus.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Dec 2008
Posts: 2
Default compelling neighbour to remove dangerous tree

Peter Jason wrote:


I have survived to tell thee.


Even though you don't bother to read all the given facts.
  #19   Report Post  
Old 01-12-2008, 10:13 PM posted to aus.gardens,aus.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Nov 2006
Posts: 72
Default compelling neighbour to remove dangerous tree


"TomTom" wrote in message
...
Peter Jason wrote:


I have survived to tell thee.


Even though you don't bother to read all the given facts.


I should, but it's difficult because lawyers are so verbose.
Can't you structure your documents to allow speed reading?


  #20   Report Post  
Old 02-12-2008, 03:13 AM posted to aus.gardens,aus.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Apr 2008
Posts: 114
Default compelling neighbour to remove dangerous tree

On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 17:41:10 +1100, quick wrote:


Because the tree is massive, dangerous and hemmed in by houses and yards,
the cost for removal is going to run into thousands. I would rather pay
lawyers than practice self help.


No one is suggesting that you remove it yourself,although I believe that
legally you are entitled to remove what normally overhangs your fence, so
long as removal does not endanger the tree/make the situation worse.



  #21   Report Post  
Old 04-12-2008, 10:15 PM posted to aus.gardens,aus.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Nov 2008
Posts: 5
Default compelling neighbour to remove dangerous tree

On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 13:13:35 +1100, terryc
wrote:

On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 17:41:10 +1100, quick wrote:


Because the tree is massive, dangerous and hemmed in by houses and yards,
the cost for removal is going to run into thousands. I would rather pay
lawyers than practice self help.


No one is suggesting that you remove it yourself,although I believe that
legally you are entitled to remove what normally overhangs your fence, so
long as removal does not endanger the tree/make the situation worse.


In fact somebody was suggesting just that - I pay for removal of the
tree in my neighbour's yard.

Council will only allow me to prune the non-lethal 10 cm branches,
not the lethal ones.

I think you have missed critical points in the thread.
  #22   Report Post  
Old 04-12-2008, 11:24 PM posted to aus.gardens,aus.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Apr 2008
Posts: 114
Default compelling neighbour to remove dangerous tree

On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 08:15:31 +1100, quick wrote:

No one is suggesting that you remove it yourself,although I believe that
legally you are entitled to remove what normally overhangs your fence, so
long as removal does not endanger the tree/make the situation worse.


In fact somebody was suggesting just that - I pay for removal of the tree
in my neighbour's yard.


Two different things. AFAIK, legally, you can hire a cherry picker and
trim the branches where they cross your boundary fence, in normal
conditions. so you are not allowed to waituntil more of it bends over in
a wind and then cut it off or reach over the boundary fence to trim it
iff.

Council will only allow me to prune the non-lethal 10 cm branches, not
the lethal ones.


Unless your council is a particularly strong on tree conservation, a
WRITTEN letter recounting your experiences and requesting action should
get a change in attitude.

Our local council has a tree preservation policy, but "dieseased,
termites, old, dropping limbs", etc are word that it accepts as reasons to
demolish.

I think you have missed critical points in the thread.


Maybe.

You haven't said anything about the age of the tree. As I've said, I have
a lovely very large gum tree in the back of my yard and frankly, it
****es of three neighbours, two side by side with pools and one(+?)
atross the road as leaves end up on his lawn(S)/verge.

I keep saying to the ones side by side, well what silly ******* installs a
swimming pool under a gum tree that is far older than all the houses
around.

Anyway, if it is an old gum tree, then you may just have to accept that
you have learnt something and put up with it or sell up and move.

OTOH, I suggest that you send a registered letter to council making them
aware of your concerns.

1) Put it in writing.

2) Send it registered. Councils can conveniently loose correspondence
when it suits. The purpose of registered is that you can prove you had
previously informed council of the dangers. Useful if you decide to seek
compensation from council for damage, etc.

3) and/or seek legal advice. If your neighbour isn't cooperative, then you
have to follow the alternatves. Beforehand, try to find some stuff on
dispute resolution as trees seem tobe a major neighbour dispute point.
you'll probably have to show that you have made attempts to approach your
neighbour about the matter.

If the tree fell on your house less than seven years ago() and yo paid for
repairs, then you can probably made a civil claim for damages.

However, if he claims that he can not trim it beause of council regs, then
you then need to go after council, which will cover its arse by saying "we
didn't know about the problem". Hence my suggestion of nw making them
aware in a written registered letter in case of any future problems.



Otherwise

  #23   Report Post  
Old 05-12-2008, 01:56 AM posted to aus.gardens,aus.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2007
Posts: 81
Default compelling neighbour to remove dangerous tree

Sorry to butt in. My question is sort of related.

I have two large trees in my front garden (we are only on a 1/8 acre block
(semi), and these trees have grown so high and so wide around the trunk that
they are pressing against the verandah decking, so would like to remove them
and replace them with something else that won't grow so tall.

I am looking around for tree workers (can be 1 or 2 only even). My question
is, are all tree loppers have to be licensed, so I know what to look for?

Thanks as always for any help.
Katherine



On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 17:41:10 +1100, quick wrote:
Because the tree is massive, dangerous and hemmed in by houses and
yards,
the cost for removal is going to run into thousands. I would rather pay
lawyers than practice self help.




  #24   Report Post  
Old 05-12-2008, 02:03 AM posted to aus.gardens,aus.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2007
Posts: 81
Default compelling neighbour 2

When you mention also the words "dangerous", "could cause injury or even
death" and the S word - "suing (maybe the council for not giving approval
for removal) - they quickly think differently.

Good luck with it.
Katherine


Our local council has a tree preservation policy, but "dieseased,
termites, old, dropping limbs", etc are word that it accepts as reasons to
demolish.





  #25   Report Post  
Old 05-12-2008, 05:59 PM posted to aus.gardens,aus.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jan 2008
Posts: 177
Default compelling neighbour to remove dangerous tree

it might be better money spent arranging with neighbour for you to pay
for and remove the tree (once you have council permission that is!).

we know someone up here had similar situation to you and that is how
they got around it, they had to also pay for stump grinding and any
repair to fences, gardens and lawns. there is always the chance when
you negotiate a deal like this that the neighbour may come to the
party in some degree?

money spent in the courts and on lawyers is "good money after bad" the
only winners usually the legal system.

On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 08:15:31 +1100, wrote:
snipped
With peace and brightest of blessings,

len & bev

--
"Be Content With What You Have And
May You Find Serenity and Tranquillity In
A World That You May Not Understand."

http://www.lensgarden.com.au/


  #26   Report Post  
Old 06-12-2008, 12:19 AM posted to aus.gardens,aus.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Nov 2008
Posts: 4
Default compelling neighbour to remove dangerous tree


"len gardener"

it might be better money spent arranging with neighbour for you to pay
for and remove the tree (once you have council permission that is!).


** Did you even read the original post ?

Relations between the OP and his neighbour are at rock bottom.


we know someone up here had similar situation to you and that is how
they got around it,



** Blah, blah blah ....

Arguing from an isolated example that you know about and others do not is
idiotic.


they had to also pay for stump grinding and any
repair to fences, gardens and lawns.


** Madness.

Does he also pay part of the neighbour's rates and tax bills ??


money spent in the courts and on lawyers is "good money after bad" the
only winners usually the legal system.



** Often there is NO alternative except to invoke the court process
*designed* for settling intractable disputes between parties. Been working
OK for the last few centuries.



...... Phil


  #27   Report Post  
Old 07-12-2008, 01:06 AM posted to aus.gardens,aus.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Nov 2006
Posts: 72
Default compelling neighbour to remove dangerous tree

Been working
OK for the last few centuries.



..... Phil





Ha....?....!


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Commercial Real Estate - 7 Compelling Reasons Business Owners albertselton Marketplace 0 28-05-2011 11:09 PM
Neighbour's tree encroaching Plum United Kingdom 58 03-02-2004 09:54 AM
Can I make my neighbour prune his tree? JK United Kingdom 11 05-05-2003 05:20 AM
OT politics : Was Can I make my neighbour prune his tree? dave @ stejonda United Kingdom 2 04-05-2003 01:32 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 GardenBanter.co.uk.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Gardening"

 

Copyright © 2017