Neighbours trees interfering with my Sky

[SamW98]

The last few weeks my Sky keeps breaking up. I got a mate who's an engineer to have a look in case there was a fault and he said the reason is that my neighbours have very high trees which have grown and are now directly in the line of where my signal is being received.

So I gave them a knock and, very politely asked if they could just cut the tops down a bit and explained why. The man who lives there looked me up and down and said 'how sad is it that you think watching tv more important than trees that have been there since before I was born' and shut the door

Now I'm not asking him to cut the trees down just cut the top back so I can watch my Sky without it breaking up

AIBU if I now cut the tops back myself? They do overhang into my garden anyway?

🤣

I live in an area with lots of trees; I knew Freeview and Sky reception would be poor, so I went for cable. Is that an option for you?

I can't really conceive of being cheeky enough to tell my neighbours to cut down their trees or worse cut them myself so that I can watch TV!

I inherited a Sky dish from the previous owners of my property, so bought a Freesat receiver and plugged in using the Sky cabling.

I had this issue last summer from surrounding trees - when winter came and the leaves fell, end of problem. Strangely enough the reception is great this year.

I’m not a huge TV watcher, so just use my wifi if I can’t get Freesat reception.

Get Sky to sort it out. They charge enough for their services and part of that is realigning dishes where there is a signal problem.

That's not always an option. We are the only house on our street that can't get sky due to the neighbours trees. There is literally nowhere for the dish to go...

We can't get cable or virgin either.

Realistically, you have a first step to take. Ringing Sky and telling them you have a signal problem is the obvious first step.

We did that years ago, when we were new to sky and very naive about such things. We were charged £65 for a Sky man to come out, take a look at it and say "It's that tree - it's blocking your signal, so there's nothing I can do".

I don't know if they care more now (or if he was just a particularly unhelpful individual - he never suggested moving the dish) - but it can't be good for the company if people are left cancelling, just because they can't be bothered to help them keep being able to use (and paying for) their service.

My neighbours moan about the height of my trees and I tell them the same as your neighbour. I like my trees. They've been there forever. I'm not touching them.

I don't know the nature of your neighbours' complaints, but in principle, I do sympathise with them. As we've seen plenty on this thread, people seem to think that trees give them carte blanche to seriously impact their neighbours' lives. Lots of other things that people could want to do/have on their own property and everybody would be saying how disgusting and unacceptable it is, but unmaintained trees really seem to bring out the selfish in a lot of people. Yes, trees are beautiful, but so are waterfalls and deer parks - it doesn't mean that they're appropriate, entirely unmanaged, in the garden of a house in a village or town.

We are the only house on our street that can't get sky due to the neighbours trees. There is literally nowhere for the dish to go...

I'd hate to be such a selfish neighbour that I maintained my right to enjoy my house to the full, at the direct expense of my neighbours' access to basic services. Bearing in mind that, if their trees are tall enough to block a signal to a Sky dish anywhere on the house, they're probably also depriving you of a lot of natural light. Legal, maybe; incredibly selfish, definitely.

I'd hate to be such a selfish neighbour that I maintained my right to enjoy my house to the full, at the direct expense of my neighbours' access to basic services. Bearing in mind that, if their trees are tall enough to block a signal to a Sky dish anywhere on the house, they're probably also depriving you of a lot of natural light. Legal, maybe; incredibly selfish, definitely.

It is very frustrating. We have NowTV but is isn't as good as Sky. we're just hoping Sky will introduce a streaming service soon or drastically improve Now TV.

@WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll

We are the only house on our street that can't get sky due to the neighbours trees. There is literally nowhere for the dish to go...

I'd hate to be such a selfish neighbour that I maintained my right to enjoy my house to the full, at the direct expense of my neighbours' access to basic services. Bearing in mind that, if their trees are tall enough to block a signal to a Sky dish anywhere on the house, they're probably also depriving you of a lot of natural light. Legal, maybe; incredibly selfish, definitely.

You don't need Sky, there are other options. A tree should never be chopped down for one person to have Sky. Anyone who thinks that's a reasonable request is pretty damn selfish.

@Remoulade You don't need Sky, there are other options. A tree should never be chopped down for one person to have Sky. Anyone who thinks that's a reasonable request is pretty damn selfish.

The OP didn't suggest chopping down the tree. They suggested trimming it and removing the branches that were blocking the signal. That sounds like normal tree maintenance that the owner should be doing on a regular basis anyway. Trouble is that a lot of householders just ignore their trees and let them grow out of control, causing lots of issues for their neighbours.

You don't need Sky, there are other options

Like what?
Cable? Op can't get it,
Streaming? Many rural properties don't have stable broadband

Op I do think you should have offered to pay to have them trimmed, but I can't believe the amount of replies that think yabu, I can only assume its a MN snobbery thing about Sky probably beacuse it's where the football lives

@SamW98 We had this problem - neighbours with high trees and no cable/fibre available.

The Sky engineer said the dish couldn't be resited but we called an independent engineer/contractor via Rated People to have a look and he did move it - this solved all the problems. So, you are not totally out of options if Sky won't do it. Hope you get sorted

I can only assume its a MN snobbery thing about Sky

Why on Earth would you assume that? 😂

@Crockof

You don't need Sky, there are other options

Like what?
Cable? Op can't get it,
Streaming? Many rural properties don't have stable broadband

Op I do think you should have offered to pay to have them trimmed, but I can't believe the amount of replies that think yabu, I can only assume its a MN snobbery thing about Sky probably beacuse it's where the football lives

I agree. We don't have cable on our road, and the broadband is poor as it's still the old BT copper cable which means slow speed and regular outages.

And yes, the OP should have offered to pay to have the branches removed - that's probably why the neighbour was off hand.

[quote Badbadbunny]**@Remoulade* You don't need Sky, there are other options. A tree should never be chopped down for one person to have Sky. Anyone who thinks that's a reasonable request is pretty damn selfish.*

The OP didn't suggest chopping down the tree. They suggested trimming it and removing the branches that were blocking the signal. That sounds like normal tree maintenance that the owner should be doing on a regular basis anyway. Trouble is that a lot of householders just ignore their trees and let them grow out of control, causing lots of issues for their neighbours.[/quote]
I have TPOs on my trees. They won't be getting anything above 7 metres from the ground trimmed without planning permission. Which you rarely get and certainly wouldn't get cause the neighbour can't watch Sky.

Like what?
Cable? Op can't get it,
Streaming? Many rural properties don't have stable broadband

There aren't many places in the UK today where that is the case. I live in a village with shocking internet, but streaming is never an issue whatsoever.

Sky dishes have to face a certain way and angle, that's why in neighborhoods all of the dishes are facing the same way.

If OP's dish can't be raised any higher and it can't be moved then she's within her rights to cut any overhanging branches.

You are the CF here.

Even aside from what you want doing, you shouldn't be asking them to do it, your intro should have been "I will pay for a tree surgeon to do it professionally".

[quote Badbadbunny]**@Remoulade* You don't need Sky, there are other options. A tree should never be chopped down for one person to have Sky. Anyone who thinks that's a reasonable request is pretty damn selfish.*

The OP didn't suggest chopping down the tree. They suggested trimming it and removing the branches that were blocking the signal. That sounds like normal tree maintenance that the owner should be doing on a regular basis anyway. Trouble is that a lot of householders just ignore their trees and let them grow out of control, causing lots of issues for their neighbours.[/quote]
Thank you. My OP wasn't as clear as it could have been as I wrote it very quickly and it doesn't read very well

To clarify - I am not wanting to chop any trees down. just trim back the some of the branches. I've lived here since 2003 had Sky since the day I moved in and the trees were nowhere near the height they are now when I moved in. This is a very recent problem due to the growth of the trees. And its not just a single tree, there are a whole run of trees along the length of my side (my neighbours back) fence. I can't see my neighbours house or garden through the trees.

And I can't remember my exact wording but I didn't demand my neighbour cut down or paid for the trees to be trimmed himself, I actually asked if he could get the trimmed or if there was anything I could do myself to arrange for it to be done. My ex husband would have been willing to help and he has in the past cut back overhanging beaches but they are now too tall for him to reach

@SuperstoreFan

Sky dishes have to face a certain way and angle, that's why in neighborhoods all of the dishes are facing the same way.

If OP's dish can't be raised any higher and it can't be moved then she's within her rights to cut any overhanging branches.

I had a look outside and all of the other houses in my row have theirs positioned at exactly the same height and angle. Ours is just several feet higher and is already in line with our attack window so pretty much as high as it can go

Just move the entire tree a couple of inches every day so he doesn't notice. Eventually you'll get your clear line of sight to the satellite.

You don't need Sky, there are other options

Not always.

Ours is just several feet higher and is already in line with our attack window so pretty much as high as it can go

Ours was resited to the top of a pole attached to our wall so it was higher than our roof

@Remoulade I have TPOs on my trees. They won't be getting anything above 7 metres from the ground trimmed without planning permission. Which you rarely get and certainly wouldn't get cause the neighbour can't watch Sky.

You can get permission to trim trees with TPOs. We suffer from some huge Scots Pine trees just over our garden fence in a neighbour's garden. They've grown enormously since we moved in 25 years ago (as seen from pictures on the estate agents brochure we've kept). Over the years, we've applied for, and been granted, permission, several times, to have overhanging branches removed and the height reduced. We've had to pay ourselves every time as the neighbours don't give a toss - they're not close to their house so aren't bothered about the debris, fallen branches, etc. At first, they used the "TPO" excuse as to why they wouldn't maintain them, but now they've been proved wrong and that trimming can be applied for, they just leave us to do what we want with them, so we just liaise directly with the local council as to what they'll allow.

To be fair, I’d be pretty miffed if I were the OP.

You can actually trim the branches on your side OP if it would help - From RHS website, but also everywhere else online.

^Can I cut off overhanging branches?
Yes, provided it is done without trespassing onto the other person’s property. It is also permissible to climb into the tree to undertake the work, again so long as it does not require going into the neighbour’s garden/land. Note that trees covered by a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) or in a Conservation Area will require prior consent from the local authority.^

I doubt you can ask the height to be reduced without their agreement however if there are no TPOs on the trees you should be within your rights to cut any branches which are overhanging your garden as long as you offer the trimmings back to the neighbour.

[quote Badbadbunny]**@Remoulade* I have TPOs on my trees. They won't be getting anything above 7 metres from the ground trimmed without planning permission. Which you rarely get and certainly wouldn't get cause the neighbour can't watch Sky.*

You can get permission to trim trees with TPOs. We suffer from some huge Scots Pine trees just over our garden fence in a neighbour's garden. They've grown enormously since we moved in 25 years ago (as seen from pictures on the estate agents brochure we've kept). Over the years, we've applied for, and been granted, permission, several times, to have overhanging branches removed and the height reduced. We've had to pay ourselves every time as the neighbours don't give a toss - they're not close to their house so aren't bothered about the debris, fallen branches, etc. At first, they used the "TPO" excuse as to why they wouldn't maintain them, but now they've been proved wrong and that trimming can be applied for, they just leave us to do what we want with them, so we just liaise directly with the local council as to what they'll allow.[/quote]
Well, not around here you can't. The only permission granted in the last 15+ years was to remove one that was damaging two others.