AIBU to resent being asked to pay for neighbours cutting back our tree?

[Eatyourgreensplease]

We have lived in our house for 20+ years in most of that time the house next door to us has been rented out with various families having lived in the house in that time. Recently the landlord evicted a family and is making extensive improvements to the house because of the damage caused.
We have a tree on our boundary (think ornamental blossom type) which we keep shaped and tidy on our side. We have done the same on the neighbours side in the past but recently the tenants in the property have not been in agreement to us doing this. As a result the tree has grown into the neighbours garden quite significantly and no attempt has been made to keep it trimmed. Today the landlord has asked us to pay to have the tree cut back to the boundary line and for the debris to be removed. Apparently the letting agent has advised them that if we don’t agree to do this, then the branches should just be thrown over into our garden!

We agreed will cut back the tree and deal with the debris, but am I unreasonable to think the landlord and previous tenants are CFs who should have not allowed it to get to this state? And while I recognise that it is by law their right to cut back the tree that has grown onto their property, it’s also unreasonable to expect us to pay to deal with that? Surely that’s just something we all take care of in our own gardens?

Trees aren’t a menace that sneak up on you while they’re sleeping. They’re perfectly ordinary (and on the whole very good!) things to have growing in a garden.

I'm confused. My neighbours let their trees overhang to my side. I cut and throw back. Done this for years. Is this not ok?

I agree trees and bushes (including brambles) are wonderful things.

Even more so when they are planted in appropriate positions where they can grow to their natural size.

Brambles do sneak up on you though.

First post nails it. He pays. He disposes of waste (unless you want it)

Are you being deliberately ridiculous?

Yes I would also find the letting agent and ask to speak to the owner about the “advice” they are giving out….

I don’t understand all the votes for YABU, OP tried to keep the tree maintained and wasn’t allowed access. It’s probably now become a bigger job.

Mumsnet is full of people who think that if they have decided something is fair or morally right, the law will agree with them.

Being on Mumsnet has been instructive in understanding why so many people undertake litigation they aren't likely to win, or is unlikely to be cost effective.

You don't have to pay . Why not let them deal with it?

Well, I was sort of joking, but so many people who also have trees too big for there garden have got so cross, I am becoming more entrenched.

My basic point is that if you want a big tree, plant it well away from the boundary.

If you want a small tree that needs pruning, plant it far enough from the boundary so that you can prune it without going next door.

OP made it clear the neighbours wouldn’t let them cut it back!

If the tree canopy was wholly within your boundary, you would quite happily have paid for the whole tree to be trimmed. Technically you can refuse to pay but why not be the bigger person and pay?

Your neighbour is well within their rights to cut the tree to the boundary provided it does not destabilise the tree. If it is large tree and their actions destabilise the tree that is a different matter. I am assuming as it’s an ornamental tree it does not fall into that category, so it’s not likely to fall on the house for example. It is your responsibility to look after the tree, I understand the annoyance with the tenant but it sounds like the agreement should have been with the landlord.

you’re meant to offer back, not throw back.

YANBU. Some bonkers replies on here. It’s completely their responsibility to cut back anything on their side, and to pay for it. They need to offer the offcuts to you, but you don’t have to accept, and so it’s their responsibility to dispose of them. The fact that it’s your tree has nothing to do with it.

I wouldn't want my any of my trees to be at the mercy of a random person trimming them, with no regard to weight stability, disease prevention, or aesthetics. I'd pay for it myself this time, but ask the landlord to insert a tenancy clause that allows you to maintain the tree 2 x a year

Seriously, you shouldn't be posting on a thread with a tree query if all you can come up with is unfeasible cod science!

That’s a really good idea.

What does "unfeasible cod science" mean?

I have moved trees in the past, up to 15 feet high. You have to be quite expert, and do it at the right time of year. It is not realistic if half the roots are in someone else's garden though.

However, as already mentioned I was sort of joking.

What planet are you on love? You can hardly dig up a mature tree with a spade. 😆Plus most people wouldn't be able to get a digger onto their property so don't offer that idea either.

I have this problem (the bloody thing must be 60ft). Does that mean if it, or part of it, should fall in a storm and damage my house, shed or fences, that the neighbour who owns it is not liable?

Mumsnet is also full of people who are totally lacking in common sense on some subjects.

Maybe I've missed something, but is there any reason why you can't ask the LL to allow you access to cut it back?

If they can be shown to have been negligent, then they can be liable. It's their property.