AIBU to think that people should have to get permission from all surrounding neighbors before cutting down a tree?

[ElberethGilthoniel]

I live in a third floor flat with a lovely surrounding of trees on each side giving a treehouse sort of vibe.

Two times over this summer, neighbors in houses with large gardens have chopped down huge trees (approx 30 meters) that must have been over 50 years old.

This has really affected the views and amount of light from both sides of our flat, and made the whole area less appealing. Is it unreasonable to think that there should have been some neighborhood consultation before they did this? Or some sort of democratic process?

We live in conservation area and need council permission to even prune our trees...even where they are causing subsidence, walls falling and overhanging into the alleyway. Conversely despite not giving us permission to prune one of our monster trees another department has written to us warning us that Our tree is overhanging council property and needs pruning. Its a bit of a pickle, if we had to consult neighbours as well it would be even worse!

@Elma2021

I think there is a general sense on this thread that just because OP lives in a flat rather than a house that they are somehow less entitled to have a say about their surroundings. By living in a flat OP is living in a way that is far more sustainable and frankly also the only option for many people. This idea that he should like it or lump it if he doesn't own the land seems very elitist. I think it is disgracefull that people can cordon off sections of our country just because they money and then do whatever they like with regardless of the environmental or social impacts it may have.

What!?

It’s nothing to do with living in a flat! Everything to do with not owning, and most importantly, not being responsible for the the tree.

giving a treehouse sort of vibe.

Your treehouse is someone else’s dark and dismal.

Move to a treehouse if that’s what you’re after.

YABVU. The saying: 'Not your circus, not your monkeys' seems apt, lol, or in this case 'not your tree, not your forest'.

I think there is a general sense on this thread that just because OP lives in a flat rather than a house that they are somehow less entitled to have a say about their surroundings.

Err, no. Flat or mansion, if the tree doesn’t belong to you, you can’t make any decisions about it. You can be as entitled to an opinion as you like, but you get no say in whether the tree stays or goes.

(Alas, or I’d have chopped down my neighbours’ leylandii long ago!)

Yours is a good idea in principle, OP. Trees should be loved and respected more than they sometimes are. For particularly special ones, you can apply to the council for Tree Preservation Orders to be placed on them. Last time I looked, "amenity" (meaning say wildlife value) was not grounds to give an order, but that may have changed, and there are other things you can argue for giving a tree a protection order such as character of neighbourhood. When a TPO is in place, owners need to apply for permission to prune or fell it.

I don't like to see trees being cut down either, but I'm not sure why surrounding neighbours have to police the morality of their neighbours? And think how the consuming this would be and the amount of paperwork. Sometimes trees really have to be cut down for safety, but in your proposed scenario, some random guy who lives near me could object and I'd have to prove the tree wasn't safe or something?

@ElberethGilthoniel

Of course the person who owns the house could have final say, but some consultation would have been a lot more friendly and foster a better community around about

It wouldn’t though, if they went ahead despite objections. You’d feel more aggrieved they ignored you, surely?

It’s their tree and their garden. In honesty they didn’t have to ask anyone. They may have let their next door neighbours know the tree was being taken down as a courtesy due to the noise and mess it would cause.

Tree roots actually go really far and perfectly healthy trees can actually be diseased or rotten, or as was in our case covered in devils ivy which may look nice but actually eventually strangled the tree, devils ivy is hard to kill and unfortunately had taken over the tree and we couldn’t kill it despite trying to.

Nope. Sometimes trees look unproblematic but the roots may be causing subsidence on surrounding properties. Unless you live in a conservation area you don't really get a say.

@ElberethGilthoniel

Of course the person who owns the house could have final say, but some consultation would have been a lot more friendly and foster a better community around about

How will this work though OP?

Consult everyone who can see the tree and then do as you like anyway? Is this really going to improve community feelz?

I mean presumably if someone is going to fell a big tree they will have a reason for it. How would you feel about having to run personal decisions about your flat past the neighbours?

Remember also that some enormous trees aren't automatically environmentaly friendly. Those that aren't native species or those which are planted in a space which is just too small to cope with the sap/leaf drop/shade/sucking up all moisture ect.

‘ and it's against the law to fell any trees between February and late September at all.’ this isn’t true though, especially if the trees are partly dead or can become dangerous.

No, if you want a tree op. Grow your own, the can cause so many issues when they grow too tall and are costly to maintain, which is why you’ll see so much tree death because people don’t maintain them.

It’s the ultimate in entitlement though, thinking you should have some form of say on what someone does in their garden becayse you liked looking at it and you don’t want your view of their garden spoiled.

@Gumboots29

YABU.

I had to cut a tree of that size down in my garden. I really didn’t want to but it had been left to grow unchecked by previous owners and had some rotting/disease. I could have caused massive damage to ours and our neighbours houses had it fallen in a storm or wind.

We told our neighbours that the tree was going (as it’s a noisy job) but by no means did we ask permission. Assumed they’d rather have no tree than a branch through their roof in a storm.

I think most people are responsible and down cut them down on a whim. It’s extremely expensive for a start!

Same here. We had 2 large sycamores felled recently. Both were old and rotting and would have caused significant damage to surrounding properties if they’d fallen. The tree surgeon described them as the weeds of trees and needed high maintenance to stop them becoming unmanageable which was as good a reason for them to go as the rot tbh.

Exactly what @Bluntness100 said. Honestly OP, get over yourself.

@Bluntness100

It’s the ultimate in entitlement though, thinking you should have some form of say on what someone does in their garden becayse you liked looking at it and you don’t want your view of their garden spoiled.

It could be just as easily argued that it's entitled to think just because you have a mortgage on a piece of land that the tree happens to be growing out of, you have a right to disrupt other people's enjoyment of it without consulting them

It could be just as easily argued that it's entitled to think just because you have a mortgage on a piece of land that the tree happens to be growing out of, you have a right to disrupt other people's enjoyment of it without consulting them

It really couldn’t, 😂😂😂

@Staryflight445

‘ and it's against the law to fell any trees between February and late September at all.’ this isn’t true though, especially if the trees are partly dead or can become dangerous.

No, if you want a tree op. Grow your own, the can cause so many issues when they grow too tall and are costly to maintain, which is why you’ll see so much tree death because people don’t maintain them.

To be fair to that poster she did say that was the law where she's lived previously and not in the UK.

We had to cut down a very large sycamore in our garden, it looked very healthy leaf wise but the specialist who checked on our trees yearly explained it was actually rotten and dangerous.

It cost a lot to remove but he was right the stump showed just how rotten it was.
Our neighbors would have had no way of knowing this.

@Elma2021

I think there is a general sense on this thread that just because OP lives in a flat rather than a house that they are somehow less entitled to have a say about their surroundings. By living in a flat OP is living in a way that is far more sustainable and frankly also the only option for many people. This idea that he should like it or lump it if he doesn't own the land seems very elitist. I think it is disgracefull that people can cordon off sections of our country just because they money and then do whatever they like with regardless of the environmental or social impacts it may have.

I disagree, I don't think people are saying it's because OP lives in a flat. People are saying the person who owns the land the tree is on decides what happens to the tree.

On a side note, getting a tree felled is expensive. The neighbours are unlikely to have gone to the expense for no good reason.

But overall if one of my neighbors came over and told me they didn't like my gardening I'd laugh, thinking there was no way they were serious.

Round here you need council permission to chop down trees. You should have objected, op.
It may not have overruled the decision to grant permission (unlikely, really), but you asked about democratic process.
There is one 🤷🏻‍♀️

Op if it helps, your wording “just because you have a mortgage on a piece of land that the tree happens to be growing out of, you have a right to disrupt other people's enjoyment of it without consulting them”

Indicates you don’t understand mortgages.

A mortgage is a loan
The lender takes a charge over the property as security.
So if you fail to pay they can legally force a sale and recoup their money
The lender doesn’t own the property.
The borrower does.
They own the land, the buildings and everything on it. Including the trees.
They are legally responsible as the owners.

So basically what you’ve just written is just because you own a tree doesn’t mean you’ve the right to disrupt others enjoyment without consulting them

And it does mean that, it means exactly that, they have full legal rights. They are the owner. Your enjoyment of their property is irrelevant.

We recently had to have 3 trees removed from our garden (at a considerable cost). The majority of neighbouring houses were delighted due to an increase in light but one commented at the loss of a lovely elm. We had to explain that the elm was diseased and would have fallen over (not any time soon but would have eventually) towards their property. That changed their mind! Mature trees/gardens are wonderful but many people don't understand the upkeep of keeping them.

It could be just as easily argued that it's entitled to think just because you have a mortgage on a piece of land that the tree happens to be growing out of, you have a right to disrupt other people's enjoyment of it without consulting them

Erm no it couldn't. What I do on my property is none of anyone else's business providing it's legal.

You have no idea what was going going on with the trees, they may have looked healthy but could have been causing all sorts of problems underground.

How many people did you expect them to consult before they made a decision? Your entitlement is staggering, I have never complained about what a neighbour has done on their own property. I had a neighbour complain about some hedges I removed once, I had very good reason to do it, I effectively told him, politely but firmly, to fuck off.

@ElberethGilthoniel

I live in a third floor flat with a lovely surrounding of trees on each side giving a treehouse sort of vibe.

Two times over this summer, neighbors in houses with large gardens have chopped down huge trees (approx 30 meters) that must have been over 50 years old.

This has really affected the views and amount of light from both sides of our flat, and made the whole area less appealing. Is it unreasonable to think that there should have been some neighborhood consultation before they did this? Or some sort of democratic process?

@ElberethGilthoniel

If you like the 'treehouse vibe' then all I can suggest is you move and live in a treehouse.

Sounds daft?

Well not as daft as expecting people who own trees (that are on their land,) to consult everyone in the neigbourhood to make sure they're OK with the trees being chopped.

We had 3 big trees (around 25 feet high) in our garden when we moved in, over a decade ago. They grew 10 feet within the first 3-4 years, and they were only 6-8 feet from the public footpath.

5 years after moving in, a dozen trees came down in the village, during a storm (and parts of some snapped off) and one actually dropped a massive branch that landed on a woman, and put her in hospital with multiple fractures.

So this, coupled with the fact the tree roots were lifting up the public footpath, made us take the decision to have all 3 removed. We though 'no WAY are we being responsible for the repairs to the footpath, OR being responsible for someone getting badly hurt - or even paralysed by a falling tree branch hitting them.'

Several people said 'awww what a shame those 3 trees went.' But they were OUR trees on OUR land and OUR responsibility. Would the 'what a shame to chop such nice tree down' brigade have coughed up for path repairs, or paid compensation to someone hurt by falling branches? Would they heck! What's more, these were trees that should never have been planted on a domestic property, 8 feet from a public footpath anyway. If they had been left to grow, they'd have reached 100 feet high!

ElberethGilthoniel YABVU.

And @Elma2021 it's got smeg-all to do with the OP being in a flat. Don't be silly!