To refuse to pay to cut neighbour's tree?

[Latetotheparty26]

Neighbour has a tree on their land which shades our garden in summer. I mentioned 3 years ago that it would be great if they could trim the height. At the time, they refused as they had just opened own business and couldn't afford it. I accepted that and felt bad asking.
I asked again last summer, was given lots of excuses about nesting birds (I didn't expect it cut until it was the right time to do so), that it was a noise barrier (very new house with great double glazing) and also a security measure (tree is between fence and main road which is 10-15 foot high off road).
Met with them this week for them to tell me (in a very round about way) that, yes they finally had sorted someone to come and trim all their hedges (out of which this tree grows) and that the guy would quote on the tree - I was very pleased but, they then went on to say that they guy would let me know his quote to sort the tree and that with their permission he was to quote it be trimmed to a (very specific) height and that he was to not trample/flatten the bushes surrounding it.
I was left speechless! They want me to pay, to cut their tree with very specific requirements!
I know legally we have no leg to stand on, the tree does not obstruct daylight from our house, but...SURELY I can expect my neighbour to be...reasonable and neighbourly and maintain a pretty big tree!? It's only going to get bigger!

Well it depends on the council rules of the region. We used to be in this position with our old neighbours. They had a huge tree that grew and grew until it nearly completely shaded our back yard.

We went to the council and discussed it with them. They said if the tree is blocking too much light, is dropping excessive leaves into our property or causing disruption to a fence line or structures in our proeperty we were legally allowed to ask them to cut it at their expense.

If they refused it goes to a tribunal or sorts and if we could prove any of the above, the neighbours would be forced into cutting it.

Fair enough in my opinion.

Odd that their first response was that they couldn't afford it but their later one was to tell you you're paying.

Perhaps they were unaware of their legal obligations until they did some research.

If you want it you pay. Unfortunately for you.

Just listen to yourself. You are getting all arsy about the wanting work done to their specifications IN THEIR OWN GARDEN.

Of course they are saying what they want the hedge to look like, as this is their view out of their house!

You are very lucky they have said yes. The tree doesn't bother them.at all, but they are willing to do it FOR YOU.

You get all the benefit from it. You pay.

We had a large tree which overshot our neighbours garden. We arranged to have it. Chopped, even though I liked it. They contributed as a thank you.

I'm on the fence here, I think if they are happy with thr tree, and you only want it cutting back because it makes your garden shaded (which is why you want it done, let's be honest, it's not road safety) then you should offer to pay for it.

I'm in two minds if I would pay for it if it was my tree, but I think if I didn't have a good relationship with my neighbours, as you're indicating, then I'd probably have you pay for it. I would struggle to see why I should pay to change something I was happy with just to make you happy.

They've not been the best of neighbours in all, there has been A LOT of small quibbles we've had with them over the years which I think have heightened my annoyance about this tree.

Like many others I suspect that might be because you have some odd ideas about what makes a good neighbour, in law or otherwise, OP.

Your neighbours have been quite generous, sourcing a tree surgeon, taking their time out to discuss what is needed with him, getting a quote, agreeing a scope of works and then letting you know how much it would be. ALL OF WHICH was actually your responsibility in law, once you had decided that he tree overhang needed cutting back.

Have a look at the Garden Law website. You'll see literally hundreds of irate people arguing that this is not fair, all being told that they are wrong.

Oh in case no one has mentioned this. You say it's a new house was the tree there first? Can it be seen from public footpaths? You may need permission from the council first before trimming it.

Can’t get over all the CFS on mums net. So those of you telling the OP she is being unreasonable, so you really think it’s ok to have a tree on your property that ruins the neighbors sun/quality of life/decreases property value? If you do then you are the CFs. Maintain your own property so it doesn’t negatively affect the neighbors !

Trees NEED to be cut! I spoke to a tree specialist about a bit of land I was thinking of buying and he was horrified how neglected the trees were and showed me the problems they were having as a result.

Offer to pay half OP. They should get them trimmed intermittently for the health of the tree.

My neighbour wanted my trees cut down, said they blocked their light, completely untrue, the neighbours on the side where the trees actually blocked any light tried to get a court order to stop them being cut down as that would remove all privacy for them. Housing association ordered me to cut them down or be evicted, trees are gone, neighbours have no privacy, my neighbour has moved out, I had to pay to destroy trees which were here many many years before I got here, against my will and my other neighbours' will.

Claudia1980, it's shade.People plant trees deliberately to create shade.OP might not like it - I don't like gardens that are bleak open runs of fence and grass,looking at that reduces my enjoyment of my property which is what the shade from this tree is doing for the OP.
Doesn't mean I get to make my neighbours plant trees.

Trees NEED to be cut! I spoke to a tree specialist

Let me guess, a tree surgeon with a vested interest in generating work for themselves. Trees do not 'need to be cut', in fact doing so generally makes the situation worse within a short space of time. Trees are very efficient at recovering their foliage meaning you're back cutting them again on a regular basis.

*Well it depends on the council rules of the region. We used to be in this position with our old neighbours. They had a huge tree that grew and grew until it nearly completely shaded our back yard.

We went to the council and discussed it with them. They said if the tree is blocking too much light, is dropping excessive leaves into our property or causing disruption to a fence line or structures in our proeperty we were legally allowed to ask them to cut it at their expense.

If they refused it goes to a tribunal or sorts and if we could prove any of the above, the neighbours would be forced into cutting it. *
You're not in England or Wales then as none of that is anything for a council to become involved in.

I've made a mess of quoting in that last post. Hope it makes sense.

Trees NEED to be cut

They really don't- unless you want timber or browse or they are dangerous.

Fruit trees need pruning and maintenance otherwise trees should be left alone, unless they dangerous.

They cannot force you. We have a lot of trees on the private estate here and every few years pay for a tree surgeon to report on if any need to be trimmed or come down to reduce the risks a branch or whole tree will fall on a member of the public. However on people's own land it is up to them. I would never cut those on my land back as I like the privacy. I have loads of trees. I do cut the hedges however but that's different from the trees. Not only do some of my trees have preservation orders on but any tree works of any kind in our area require you to give the council 6 weeks notice of the works as we are in a conservation area.

there have been A LOT of small quibbles we've had with them over the years

Well, if you’ve behaved as you come across in this thread, OP I can see why.

And I’m a bit at some of the attitudes to trees on this thread. Trees are essential for our well-being in so many ways.

My NDN doesnt like my tree.

I neither like nor dislike my tree

My NDN pays to have it cut to suit him.

I'm not going to pick you up on your obvious mistake about conservation areas and the use of the word 'permission'. OK - in a Conservation Area you are required to give 6 weeks notice in order that the Council has the opportunity if it wishes to impose a TPO. There are penalties for doing tree work without giving this period of notice. For administrative convenience, many Councils feed this through their Planning Application sausage machine. So in practice it amounts to waiting for permission to be given.

For TPOs, the legislation includes requirements for the work to be done to standards of sound arboricultural practice and allows LAs to apply conditions to this effect - for the LA the easiest way of achieving this is to require work on trees with a TPO to be done by a qualified arboriculturalist. So it may not be a requirement set out in primary legislation, but depending on your LA it may be a requirement that you will have to adhere to if you want to carry out work.

Pay someone to cut all the branches that over hang on your side and chuck them back over there fence. It’s legally there property so you have to return them No - you are required to offer them, but if they decline the offer it is your responsibility to dispose.

If you have a large overgrown tree There isn't such a thing as an overgrown tree. Trees grow. They don't need to be regular chopped for their health.

we are talking about one tree, not the mass deforestation of the rainforests Within a conurbation there are lots of examples of "one tree" and cumulatively removing them has deleterious effects, eg raising the probability of flash flooding and raising the temperature withing the urban area.

I understand the tree is on their land but I think you should offer to pay towards it being cut because

1. they are arranging it at your request
2. it being cut would improve your life, so if you can afford it I'd throw the money at it and enjoy the benefits

You know the tree will grow back don't you? You will be having this discussion (and cost) forever if you insist on being bothered by trees.

My neighbour has an issue with our large tree. For us its great, offers a small amount of shade for summer, blocks the view of a block of flats, has a swing for kids and generally looks nice.

See want to keep a very precise garden, so no overhanging tree and her view is different so it’s not such a good screen for her. She’s always on about getting rid.

My compromise has been to say anything over the fence is fair game, but I’ve asked she uses a tree surgeon who’s sensitive to unbalancing the tree. We have removed a few lower branches ourselves to maintain balance.

If the tree was a danger I’d move it. We just had different views of what a nice garden is. We both have large gardens, she wants hers like a show garden and I like a bit of wild

In the spirit of neighbourliness I would agree to reducing the tree but I wouldn't expect to pay. Many people would keep the large tree in situ; it might be the reason they bought the house. Lots of people would like the privacy and wildlife shelter it affords.i'm surprised by your outlook on this OP.
Over the years next door have lopped over hanging branches from our trees and we have done likewise we always discuss first but I wouldn't go sides charging our neighbour for our convenience.

Odd that their first response was that they couldn't afford it but their later one was to tell you you're paying.

"Perhaps they were unaware of their legal obligations until they did some research."

What 'legal obligation'? There is none.