Buying house next to trees

[yougotmeonspeedial]

Posting here unashamedly for traffic.

We are being given a large sum from family to help us move out of where we live - run down town where we see drug activity, and schools are in a sorry state.

The money is being gifted to help us get DC into a really good state secondary. But the area is very expensive and there’s not loads on the market, and we are average earners.

We made an offer on a house that clearly was a fixer upper, and the survey has brought up several extra issues- costly roof repairs that weren’t clear (awaiting formal estimates and possible re-negotiation with sellers), and the need for trees next to property to be maintained. It’s taken me weeks to get answers on these trees - and it’s apparent they are on unregistered land. We thought they formed part of the play park. No one is responsible for them. They are as close as 2-3 meters from the house, and whilst most are hazel (shallow roots) I think there’s a sycamore there too.

I think we should pull out. This house is going to stretch us - mortgage will be 25% of our income taking us right up to retirement age, with about £3000 a month left over before all other bills, do-able, but the idea was to downsize/ relocate in 10 years when schooling is done so that we don’t have to work beyond 70.

Having spoken to a tree surgeon I’m not worried these trees will damage the property in the immediate future- they are smaller trees and we’ve had surveys done to check drains etc are clear, but I’m very worried that they will make the house hard to sell in the future.

I’m very worried if we pull out now that we will end up in a long chain and miss the school application deadline (this oct).

Should I suck it up and accept the risk for the sake of my child’s education? Or try and find something somewhere else? we love the house and the area, but I’m loosing sleep over this (and yes, I’m very prone to anxiety and struggling to work out if it’s just me or not). Gift givers have made it clear that they think we should just get on with it and will be very disappointed if we take the money and move but don’t get a place.

YABU - crack on, it’ll be fine, you’ll sell
YANBU - find something else

Yanbu to worry but I'd just carry on, if you are in London, the home will sell down the line xx

Sorry, I am a bit confused whether it's the fact that the house is next to the trees, which are not going to cause any trouble any time soon, or the cost of the house and the costly repairs that bothers you?

Not in London but the most desirable area of our locality. Best schools and proper Naice Cotswolds feel area and all that. (Not actually Cotswolds)

They are trees, not triffids.

Trees. Major repairs we’ve budgeted part for, though roof looks to be £5k more than anticipated- but we will try to renegotiate buying price over that.

Wouldn't even consider this as a reason not to buy a house. They're just trees.

I really needed that laugh today, thank you!

I'd probably find another house.

I've had experience of a house with subsidence cracks (nothing major, no structural work was needed) but the loss adjustors recommended the removal of some trees in next door neighbour's overgrown garden. NDN refused to cooperate and it took a couple of years for the loss adjuster to repeatedly try to contact them and eventually they sought legal advice to proceed without permission.

Legitimate tree surgeons won't go onto land they don't have permission to be on. The fact that the land next to your property doesn't seem to have an owner could make it difficult for you to hire someone to remove the trees.

Also, despite our subsidence occurring over 15 years ago, we're now getting hammered with house insurance increases and can't shop around because most insurers won't take a new customer with a history of a subsidence claim. So while the experience of the subsidence issues wasn't particularly bad at the time, it's still affecting us a long time later.

Why are you worried about trees? Sorry if I'm being thick but I'm very confused as to why they would be an issue!

Potential risk of subsidence affecting the house.

Exacerbated by the fact that no one owns the trees, which actually makes it more difficult to have them removed (by legitimate tree surgeons) unless the OP is willing to to try herself.

Most welcome!

Sycamores are ideally kept about 4 metres or more away from structures, but that’s a guide.

We have an extremely large sycamore fairly nearby and other than the endless seedlings in the lawn, it’s great. A beautiful tree, lots of bird life, hasn’t caused any problems.

We have 6 other large trees in the near vicinity and I regularly identify 15-18 species of bird from my patio. I feel very fortunate to live near them.

Trees in good condition and with no suggestion via the survey that they’re causing problems, I wouldn’t think twice about. I live in a leafy part of London and many streets are lined with large trees growing in the middle of the pavement just two or three metres from the houses - it’s generally seen as quite a nice feature to have rather than something which makes the houses unsellable.

It’s unlikely to be that nobody at all is responsible for the land they’re on, it will more likely be that because they’ve never been a problem, nobody has pursued all the avenues to establish who is. There will be a way of identifying who is, if you want to pursue that more thoroughly in future.

Subsidence is the concern with trees - though hazels won’t cause this. More of a risk with oaks/connfiers/willows trees that draw a lot of water which there are definitely none of

OK fair enough, but you've had a survey confirming there are no issues. I'm not exaggerating when I am we have over 20 trees on our land, some close ish to the house and we've never had a subsidence problem - the only thing it meant was that when we did an extension, we had to dig very deep foundations. It's certainly not a given that they'll cause subsidence and if a surveyor has said there are no current issues then I wouldn't even think about it being a problem.

If they were species that have the potential to grow very large then I would be very cautious, as root ingress to the house foundations can do a lot of damage. The sycamore I would not be happy about if it is only a few metres from the house walls. Hazels wouldn't be an issue at all.

I don't think the trees would put me off but the fact of the house being in a condition needing work definitely would. Ime there's ALWAYS far more work needing doing than is originally apparent, and if you don't have a ready supply of spare cash burning a hole in your pocket I'd give it a swerve. I'd rather buy a smaller property that is in good nick than something that's noticeably tatty, as issues with houses never come alone.

Are the trees protected, I.e you can’t prune or fell them without express sanction from the council tree officer? As you might want or need to if they’re causing any real issues. (I’m not talking of wanting to get rid of trees just because you don’t like clearing up autumn leaves, like a neighbour of ours. 🤬)

Sycamores, BTW, will ‘gift’ you hundreds of tiny seedlings every year, which will need pulling up asap, or you’ll very soon have a forest of 4 foot saplings!

Just read the other comments as well

I'm not in your exact position but understand being offered an imperfect escape

That's what this is. Your dc will go to a decent school and you'll be away. No point in worrying about a potential issue years from now

Plus once you move in, you can spend time trying to sort the tree issue

I'd take the way out in the form of this home x

The trees were there before the house was built (2000) so the surveyor has advised the foundations would have been build deeper and a root membrane should have been installed.

No TPO’s and not in a conservation area.

I think you're looking for an excuse not to buy.

There are different issues here.

1. Trees: You can get planning permission to trim them even if they aren’t yours. It would be your cost, which you may not want, but it’s not an uncommon occurrence.
2. Roof: if you think this wasn’t built into the advertised snd offered price then reduce your offer to enable you to cover the cost.
3. Mortgage: This is very personal to you and may depend on whether you project pay rises in the years ahead. Inflation also eats away at the value of the amount you repay each month.
4. Urgency: Again, you don’t have a crystal ball on what houses may or may not come on the market in the future and whether this will lead to you regretting buying / not buying this house.

In which case you're worrying about nothing!

OTOH my cousin, in a leafy bit of N London, had major subsidence to their front wall of their 3 story terrace house, caused by the tree in the street outside. It had to be felled but the work to underpin and repair the wall took weeks.

I would be wary of trees near a house too.

You're massively over thinking the trees. I really cannot see that this would be a big issue on resale.

Regardless, in practice who maintains the park? Being unregistered doesn't mean it's not owned and maintained. Most parks won't be registered because they won't have changed hands since registration was introduced. Does the councill list it on their website?

We live within 3 metres of a massive willow tree - it's taller than the house. It is a massive pain (yes we knew there was a tree but didn't give it much thought, more fools us).

It scares the life out of us during stormy weather.

And the mess....omg, we're not talking a few leaves here, we're talking thousands, Autumn leaf shedding (which then turns to a mass of wet, slippy mulched leaves) and then come summer it drops sap or something on the cars parked beneath it. At the moment the whole close is covered in tree debris, no other fecker clears it up, I do it all, two days later back to square one. Then there's the bird shit, dozens of birds roost in it, they use our cars as their toilet bowl. I'd never buy a house again with anything larger than a 5ft bush next to it.