To expect compensation for damage? (neigbours)

[WeeLasssie]

Our next-door neighbour’s big tree fell in our front garden in one of the recent storms and caused a lot of damage. They said they were insured and promised to sort everything out. They cleared up the mess and replaced our fence, but we are still out of pocket because of the damage to a landscaped sitting out area planted with shrubs and small trees with a pergolla. Also a car port beside the house was destroyed, lucky it was empty at the time. We’ve sent them an estimate for replacing the damage, including the cost of a new car port and all the plants, it does come to quite a lot but now they saying its too much and we’ve got to claim on our insurance. We think the tree was disseased and that’s why it fell over, but they say it’s not their fault as it was protected and they weren’t allowed to chop it down. This cant be right???
Yes=we are BU No=they are

Also it doesn't sound like they've been negligent if a tree surgeon came out and deemed it safe. The storms at the start of the year/end of last year took out lots of entirely healthy trees, sadly.

You should have been talking to your own insurance about this.

If they decided the neighbours were to blame your insurance would claim off theirs.

You should have spoken to your insurance straight away.

Claim on your insurance and they will attempt to recover the money from next door's insurance.

You can find out online if the tree was protected or by calling up your local council who will point you in the right direction of who will know this information. if it is protected then it’s not your neighbours fault and the damage cost would lie with the local council.

The tree was disseased because leaves were all whithered last year but they said a tree surgeon told them it couldn't be chopped down because it was protected. The tree surgeon said it was safe but the council was going to look at it. We dont know if its true or not.

They may be trying to fob you off. It certainly sounds like it to put you off the track.

The burden will be on the house owner to prove they had a tree care plan and it is standard to get a written report. If they cannot provide this they are talking 'man in the pub said' type of rubbish. We had our annual walk around last week and the tree plan involves some work this month and some more later in the year. We have a written report and full details of the firm's insurance which is £5m per claim. I strongly suspect your insurers may pay your losses out if they are below a certain figure, otherwise they may pursue neighbours insurers or neighbour directly. If you stump up the costs then it is entirely voluntary on your part.

Actual legal position from an actual solicitor.

www.frettens.co.uk/site/blog/litigation-blog/storm-damage-to-trees-fences-and-property-who-pays

Can I be liable for damage to a neighbours property in a storm?
When a tree is uprooted in a storm and damages your neighbour’s property it is unlikely you will be held liable unless your neighbour can prove that you have been negligent.

This type of event is commonly known as an ‘Act of God’ in legal and insurance terms. However, negligence may be proven if your neighbour had made you aware of a safety hazard concerning your tree and you had done nothing to resolve it.

So, no, the OP's neighbour is not liable, unless OP has actual proof (dated emails/copies of letters etc) that she had made her neighbour aware of a safety hazard, and they had not done anything to resolve it. There is no requirement for a tree care plan, and the burden of proof will be on the OP to prove that they had made their neighbour aware of a safety concern, and their neighbour had subsequently done nothing to resolve it (consulting a tree surgeon will likely put the neighbours in the clear).

OP should contact her insurance and take it from there.

You don't have to turn detective and you don't want to sour relationship with your neighbours

You just claim on your insurance (you have some ????)

A tree with a TPO doesn't mean it can never be touched, just that the work needs permission and needs to be proportionate and appropriate. That permission and discussion is with the local council not a tree surgeon or arborist although they may advise, it's unlikely they would say a tree was diseased but couldn't be touched because of a TPO.

You need to contact your insurers as others have said - they’ll then then sort it out with your neighbour’s insurance.

You claim on your own insurance then they will be reimbursed by your neighbours insurance. Why would you think your neighbours insurance would care about your property?

As many have said you need to claim from your own home insurance

@AllOfUsAreDead

I thought you claimed through your insurance first who then forces another company to pay for it, if someone else was to blame?

Yes.

I’ve looked into this recently because my neighbour has a huge oak tree which if it were to fall in our direction would destroy my house or parts of our garden. They never have it trimmed either and we personally paid for a huge diseased branch to be felled because it hung over our garden. Unfortunately it would fall to us to claim through our insurance so sadly YABU. I’m not sure if the ins and outs of wether the tree was unsafe but seems you will be unlikely to prove that now the tree has gone. Talk to your insurers.

@mrsm43s

Actual legal position from an actual solicitor.

www.frettens.co.uk/site/blog/litigation-blog/storm-damage-to-trees-fences-and-property-who-pays

Can I be liable for damage to a neighbours property in a storm?
When a tree is uprooted in a storm and damages your neighbour’s property it is unlikely you will be held liable unless your neighbour can prove that you have been negligent.

This type of event is commonly known as an ‘Act of God’ in legal and insurance terms. However, negligence may be proven if your neighbour had made you aware of a safety hazard concerning your tree and you had done nothing to resolve it.

So, no, the OP's neighbour is not liable, unless OP has actual proof (dated emails/copies of letters etc) that she had made her neighbour aware of a safety hazard, and they had not done anything to resolve it. There is no requirement for a tree care plan, and the burden of proof will be on the OP to prove that they had made their neighbour aware of a safety concern, and their neighbour had subsequently done nothing to resolve it (consulting a tree surgeon will likely put the neighbours in the clear).

OP should contact her insurance and take it from there.

If you are going to rely on legal advice throughout your life by lifting some lines from a webpage you are going to be disappointed.

A tree care plan is essential if a tree owner wants to show they are not negligent. Insurers will often require it under their T&Cs. I do know about this because I own woodland and am involved in interest groups.

Not a legal requirement, but that is only half the story. There is no legal requirement to jump out of a plane without a parachute. But you won't do it a second time.

So if they havn't got an actual official report, does that mean they might be liable? We don't kow if what they said about the tree surgeon was true but if they got letters or emails or if someone checks with the tree surgeon? We asked our insurers like everyone said and they said they would pay for some of the damage but wouldn't replace the full cost of the plants or the car port.

@Lincslady53

Many years ago we had a bad leak on a pipe in our shop, flooded our shop, and the shop below us, we were in a shopping centre, and the water ended up in cellar of the downstairs shop, ruining all their stock. We were told by our insurance company not to admit blame and they would sort out the claim with the other shop's insurance company when they claimed. But like a car crash situation. Claim on your insurance, let them sort it out, and don't fall out with your neighbour. You have to keep on living next to them.

Precisely this.

Say to them, "We don't need to fall out over it. This is what insurance companies are for."

And it is.

If your insurance won't pay the full cost (they must have given reasons?), then what are you proposing? Taking your neighbours to Small Claims for the difference? As liability sounds quite difficult to prove here (it's not like an unpaid invoice is it), I'm not even sure that court would deal with it. And if they do you will need legal help to make the claim as it's not at all clear cut. And then you will be in a legal wrangle with your neighbours, and all the paperwork etc ...

Just take the money from your insurers and write off the difference between that and what you believe to be the full cost and mentally file it in the 'shit happens' box. Your neighbours aren't going to pay (and morally I don't even think they should anyway). Stuff happens. If your insurance company won't give you as much money as you want then that's between you and your insurance company - not between you and your neighbours.

It's your insurance or nothing, you won't get it from theirs. It's an act of god, it came down in a storm, even if it had a disease you have no evidence this effected the roots or made its structurally unstable that it would have fallen without the storm, even if it did if they can prove they consulted a tree surgeon which would be easy to do (phone record, email of date, just a note from him to say he visited) they are covered but even without this you have very little chance. I've been through this on both sides. To be honest I'd be grateful they replaced the fences etc as we didn't even get that. If your insurance won't cover I'd see it as gone and move on as unfair as it seems.

It's down to your insurance company to investigate if they are at fault or not, not you.