to ask my neighbour to contribute to treeworks?

[CaptainNelson]

(Apologies for long post; trying not to drip feed)
We have a number of big horse chestnuts in our garden, and live in a conservation area. The part of the garden where the chestnuts grow runs alongside our neighbours' house. They are currently having their house extended, and have asked us to cut back 2 of the horse chestnuts as they're worried about conkers falling onto the new part of their property. Apparently a conker has in the past broken a Velux window in their house, though I think before we moved here and I do wonder if it's actually possible (unless squirrels have had something to do with it!). Anyway, they regularly cut back the parts of our trees which overhang their garden, which has resulted in the trees being quite lopsided. I've looked into this and found out that a neighbour has no responsibility to maintain the tree's balance when removing overhanging branches. The branches which do overhang their garden are about 3-4 metres high and are quite small, as they've removed all the larger ones. So there isn't a huge number of overhanging branches, but they still want these removed and they're too high for us to reach.
The tree surgeon has said that, in order to keep the trees balanced, they'll have to do a crown reduction of the whole tree. However, the cost of reducing the crowns is around £850, and I'm wondering whether IWBU to ask the neighbours to contribute, as this is on their request and to their benefit, and there is no real evidence that their property is being put at risk. The trees are otherwise healthy and, as I've said, there are no large branches overhanging their garden.
Wisdom of MN, advise please!

Yep I'd want them to pay for it all. Speak to council.

cant you have an extension single story back up to 3 metres length under permitted development? ie no planning permission

My answer would be: "If you want them cut, you get permission and you pay."

Sorry but I am of the opposite opinion to most posters. I think you cannot ask NDN to pay anything. They are your trees and your sole responsibility. They cut off branches at their cost that were overhanging. If you the trees to look pretty, that's up to you. If NDN asked you to make them look better, that's a different matter, but they did not ask for the trees to be planted in the first place.

Legally and I think morally, it's entirely your bill to pay.

Sorry misread - if they want the work done, they pay.

cant you have an extension single story back up to 3 metres length under permitted development? ie no planning permission

Yes but probably not if it interferes with a conservation area. I would ask your local planning office to take a look OP.

but on the same branch if the OP damages the neighbors property SHE will be liable for the damage. Or if her tree branch falls off due to rotting / unhealthy and injuries someone it will be the OP that is liable since it is HER tree does not matter that the tree overhangs the neighbors property it will be the OP that's liable.

OP do you have house insurance that covers damaged caused by your trees? please check your policy as otherwise it could be a costly mistake for you.

*sorry it should be OP trees

Hi, I would go to them with the costs for the work and ask for half in a friendly but unapologetic way as I think it would be entirely reasonable of them to pay at least half and entirely unreasonable of them to expect you to pay for all of it.

Whilst the neighbours have cut back on their side, they are not supposed to unbalance the tree. I have just undertaken a lot of work due to neighbours complaining but I am bearing the cost because I dont want them to have any say in the works undertaken.

However, there are trees just outside our boundary which require tree surgery and we know who owns them but who is now saying they dont know who owns them. This morning I went on the HM Land registry website and downloaded the title plan of their property which clearly shows they own the land the trees are on. I am certainly not getting landed with the works this time and it was £3 well spent.

I would be a bit wary about letting neighbours dictate tree works. If they bought with the trees there, then surely they weren't blind to possible issues. Yes, lets buy a house with nearby trees and then moan about them. As for a conservation area, or trees with a TPO, the fines can be horrendous. I think you need to remind them that there are significant fines for chopping back and it cannot happen again.

I don't know if councils vary but in mine if you live in a conservation area you need permission from the planning department for even minor tree pruning. And this costs a lot on top of tree surgeon bill. I'm not sure why this adds costs. Applying for permission to work on trees in a private garden in a Conservation Area does not incur a fee, and as long as you phrase your request in terms they understand like "crown lift", "crown reduction" you do not need an arboriculturalist's report.

I know this doesn't apply in OPs case, but if your tree hasn't got a TPO on it, you're allowed to do the work yourself once you've got permission. The purpose of the law on trees in Conservation Areas isn't to protect them, it's to give the Council an opportunity to decide whether they want to protect them by putting a TPO on. Unfortunately it's badly drafted legislation with no mechanism for the Council to say "we're not interested in this tree, do what you will and don't ask us again" - both you and the Council have to look at it each and every time you want to do some pruning.

It's not actually a "Planning application" either - it's just that most Councils find it cheaper and easier just to stick it into their Planning Application software.

The neighbours only want the over hanging branches cut, the majority of the work is for balancing the tree up on OPs side. I really don't think I would pay.

Thanks MereDint, that's a useful explanation. Yes, it's not planning permission, but they're using their planning portal now to make the application.
To other PPs, the extension did require planning permission, which we didn't object to as at that point, the neighbours didn't say anything about reducing the trees - only once the works had begun

I also do not understand why living in a CA and having to apply for permission adds costs.

We live in a conservation area and had to apply last summer to do a 40% crown reduction. I emailed a tree surgeon a photo of he tree and he advised me of the wording to use on the application. Took him about 10 minutes.

Applied on line (took me less than an hour). No fees were payable to the council.

As an aside to start, the fact that a person moves into a property where there are already overhanging trees, does not mean they cannot complain at any later date. They most certainly, legally, can. You could say to ndn, that you will do nothing. They are trying to up the ante with the risible claim of a broken window, ignore it. Section 211 of the Town & Country Planning Act (1990 I think) applies. Any work proposed on any tree (virtually) in a conservation area requires the consent of the council. Period. Regardless whether it is you or the neighbour proposing it. Significant fines are available for those that dont. As you have not said the tree has a TPO, assume it hasnt. Now the council officer, on visiting, may decide that the trees are indeed worthy of TPOs and further restrictions apply. (It's a possibility). Assume the process is followed, permission is given. You are not under any duty to do anything, except they're trying to push the H&S argument, when really it's amenity. Have been in similar situation with our eucalyptus tree, tho they can be iffy and was happy to chop overhang. The statutory law concerns itself with the tree, not who pays. At the extreme the ndn could try to get you an ASBO, which could require all-sorts. (Obviously won't happen). That's it, council first point of call, duty bound, then up to you, how generous you feel whatever your principals speak. Good luck.

You are on to a loser and whatever the outcome relationships will be difficult. They are entitled to cut branches that hang on their side. This is a row waiting to happen

confusedbeetle Actually they're not, as in a conservation area you have to get permission to cut any branches above a very small diameter, which they didn't. In normal circumstances, they would be, but conservation areas have different regulations. They probably would have got permission if they'd asked, mind you.
Tony2, thanks. There are no TPOs on any of the trees in our garden (at the moment, anyway). I know the law says nothing about payment, that's why I've been pondering whether to ask them - they came round to ask us to cut back the trees, but didn't say anything about paying. Pretty sure that they're forking out on their extension and so won't want to have extra costs. I contacted the council initially who told us to contact a tree surgeon. So back to the council now it seems.

If they want their side cute to facilitate their conservatory they pay to get this done. If you want the tree rebalanced you pay. If it's all being done as one job YANBU to ask for a contribution, but I'm guessing your part will be the major part of the cost.

Hmm, well I can’t comment on the conservation aspect, maybe they shouldn’t be cutting them at all, but I do have some sympathy with your neighbours.

Ours enthusiastically planted a lot of trees in their garden which ten years later are a real nuisance on our side. We cut them back every year to the boundary wall, but even so we have to spend hours gathering leaves and fallen branches, digging up suckers, etc.

We love trees and have quite a few of our own (which we maintain and which don’t impinge on our neighbours). That doesn’t mean we enjoy the work entailed in keeping someone else’s from encroaching on our garden.

As I said, things may be different if yours are protected. Even then I think it’s not unreasonable to maintain them with consideration for your neighbours. If you want the trees to have a balanced look, which after all is for your benefit, not theirs, I think you should expect to pay for it.

ponderland there is a difference though between trees entirely on their property that you want removed, which is purely a request and they do not have to oblige and trees overhanging your property.

If I were your neighbour I a)wouldn't pay b)if you refused to cut the overhanging branches I would do it myself (obviously giving the branches back to you) and send you the bill. If you refused to pay I'd take you to small claims court.

Your trees causing a nuisance - why on earth should they be our of
pocket?

The OP is under no obligation to pay for the reduction of the trees. If you took her to the small claims court you would lose.

Why are you cutting the trees unless YOU actually want the work done? The neighbours knew the tree was there before they built their extension. Surely they should be requesting and offering to pay for the work as it's only being done because of them???

The neighbours should have factored the trees into their plans for the extension. They are the ones wanting the trees done, they can pay for it and any fees associated with getting permission from the council.

Just to be clear, we absolutely did not plant these trees. They are at least 60-70 years old.
In terms of maintenance, we don't really have a chance as the neighbours cut off branches most years. It's really not necessary nor a good idea, as the tree automatically compensates by putting on extra growth where the branches have been removed. We've been here 4 years, and this is the first time they've actually said anything.

The trees were there before they bought the house. Bloody cheek, makes my blood boil when arseholes do things like this to trees.

Get the tree officer in and show them what the neighbour has done to them. They might well get fined, which could also include a proportion of the cost of a tree surgeon coming in to rebalance them.

Hi I also think it's reasonable to have it done as you don't legally have to do it and wouldn't be thinking about doing the work if they hadn't asked - if it's purely for their benefit.

Or that's what I would say to them, in reality they will also be less lob sided and also probably it's healthy for the trees to be pruned (so I understand - may be wrong)

If you want to preserve the relationship with your neighbours, I'd tread very carefully.

Our neighbours had an extension put on but found that they couldn't get (retrospective) planning permission for it because we have a eucalyptus in our adjoining back garden and it was close enough to cause concern.

The tree was planted 20 years ago, long before we moved in, but we liked it and enjoyed having one tree in our garden that wasn't bare in winter!

The neighbours asked us to have it cut down. We thought about it and eventually in the spirit of neighbourly cooperation we agreed that if they could organise (and pay for) a tree surgeon to do the job properly and replace the tree with another one of similar value (I googled for a fair price for a mature tree) we'd go for it.

They refused to use a tree surgeon - said they'd do it themselves (it was a more than 25 foot tree!) and just 'pour petrol on the stump' and didn't want to go ahead when they found out we'd also want a replacement.

Two years later the tree became a little too wobbly so for safety's sake we had it removed ourselves (by a tree surgeon!). This REALLY pissed off the neighbours (I.e. 'you wouldn't do this when we asked but you'll do it now' etc) and sadly we've gone from a friendly catch up once a week to not speaking or interacting at all.

Tread carefully OP!