Family's legal wrangle after protected tree falls on house
By Hugh FortOctober 14, 2009
A family whose new £20,000 car was destroyed when a protected tree fell on their home are angry that no one will admit responsibility a month on.
Peter Gardner and his wife returned to their home in Blake Close, Crowthorne, after a weekend away to find the massive oak had fallen on their house.
The incident happened on Sunday, September 6, and now the couple find themselves involved in a wrangle over who will pay for the damage.
The land is owned by a developer, Hazelwood Estates Holdings Ltd, and the Tree Protection Order (TPO) was introduced by Bracknell Forest Council to avoid the oak being cut down as part of the building work.
Hazelwood has permission to build three four-bedroomed houses on the land in Addiscombe Road, across the road.
Hazelwood managing director Chris Cover declined to comment further because of an investigation by Mr Gardner’s insurers, but confirmed the firm had only acquired the land from the previous owner in the last few weeks.
A Bracknell Forest spokeswoman said the matter was nothing to do with the council as the tree was on private land.
A report into the condition of the tree carried out by the previous landowner in March last year states “decay in pruning roots could lead to tree failure”, but the council decided to protect it.
Within five months, the oak fell on the Gardner’s home.
Mr Gardner said: “If either of us had been in the car, we would have been killed. It was four days old and is worth about £20,000.
“The tree also damaged the house.
“I’d say we’re about £30,000 out of pocket and we are trying to work out who is responsible.
Mr Gardner added: “We now have the dilemma of the developer saying it’s not their responsibility and the council saying it’s not their responsibility.
“The fact is a protected tree fell on our house, it’s destroyed my wife’s new car and damaged the roof of our house and our porch.
“Someone needed to make it safe and someone didn’t and someone needs to pay for the damage caused.
“So we are now going through a painstaking process of trying to work out who it is.”
Mr Gardner contacted The Standard after reading two similar reports of people saying protected trees caused a danger to their lives with overhanging branches.
Browse Sections
Most recent user comments 1 of 1
I would have thought that a tree on someone's land collapsing and damaging someone else's property is equally liable. It is part and parcel of owning something that could potentially go wrong. Doesn't mean it is anyone's fault necessarily, and maybe the tree wasn't quite at the stage of needing to be cut down immediately, but financial liability for an accident should rest with the owners of the tree.
14/10/2009 at 11:02 Offensive or Inappropriate?
Please let us know the reason you find the above comment inappropriate.