Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Real Estate
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-20-2017, 04:30 PM
 
Location: Dunnellon, FL
482 posts, read 650,978 times
Reputation: 1720

Advertisements

Is any of it on the right of way of a utility company like your electric provider? We had a live oak tree die inside our fence, but it was still on the electric company's right of way and they had it removed and paid for it. Might be worth a try!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-20-2017, 05:44 PM
 
9,891 posts, read 11,723,300 times
Reputation: 22086
Lets look at known facts:

1: The neighbor came to you and told you, that the tree had to go. You made no offer, to pay for half the costs to take it down, even after the tree service told you the tree was dying and needed to go. You were not concerned enough to be part of the cutting the tree back, so you signaled him that you were not going to do anything, so it forced him to act on his property.

2: The neighbor had the part of the tree that was on his property removed as is his right. He had no right to take the tree clear out, as half the tree was on your property and when a problem was presented to you, you did nothing or make an offer to pay for half the removal of the whole tree, or even give him permission to cut the whole tree down. A person has the right to cut what is on their side of the property line especially a tree that was in the process of dying, which he did to protect his property.

3: The remaining part of the tree is on your property. Your neighbor nor the tree company is responsible for any damage the tree does to your property. It was your lack of action, that there is any part of the tree left on your property.

4: It will need to be removed, as it is a danger to your home. It is much more of a danger now, than it had previously been when the other half of the tree was there. Painting the scars is not really going to make a difference under the condition the tree is in. It simply has to go, NOW.

5: If the insurance company knows about the current conditions, they would tell you to take it out immediately, or they would cancel your insurance. In fact they may not have to even pay for damages if the tree falls, as you were aware of the danger and did nothing. No new company would insure the home, with the existing problem.

6: For the safety of your home, you have to act now and that tree has to go.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2017, 02:28 AM
 
Location: Eugene, Oregon
11,120 posts, read 5,563,675 times
Reputation: 16596
Quote:
Originally Posted by wsamon View Post
I think I know the end result of this, but I'm curious to hear what others' input may be.

There is a large oak tree that sits right on the border of my front yard. I honestly don't know how much of the trunk is in my property, how much is in my neighbor's, and how much may be in a public space dedicated for utilities (if one even exists). Several branches from the tree overhang each of our homes.

My neighbor was informed that his home insurance would not be renewed unless the branches that overhang his house were trimmed. The trimming company representative told both of us that the tree is dying and removing the branches would destabilize some upper branches, and possibly the whole tree, that depend on them for shielding from the wind. He said the whole tree should be removed, but the quote to do so was over $4000, which my neighbor could not afford and I couldn't easily split with him. I left with the impression he was going to talk with his insurance company or seek a different one.

Yesterday a different company showed up and trimmed the tree. They removed approximately 1/3 of it, including an entire "sub trunk" about 4 feet above the ground up, all on my neighbor's side. The tree, once balanced, is now noticeably angled toward my house. To be clear, it's not tilting or anything like that, but an entire side has been removed, leaving only the "sub trunks" that grew toward my property. Considering the previous contractor's warning, I am concerned that a strong wind could cause large branches or even the entire tree to fall on my house because of the trimming done by my neighbor.

I understand why he did what he did, so I'm not super angry with him, but I'm concerned about the fallout and potential cost (long term, or short term) to me of what he did with full knowledge of the danger it posed to my property. Obviously, I can't have him glue the trunk back on or go back in time to try and work out some version of cost splitting, but is there any kind of protection or recourse for something like this either before or after an incident?
This neighbor had an obligation to inform you of what he intended to have this other tree company do and give you an opportunity to deal with it in some way. This unbalancing of the tree might have caused it to immediately topple over onto your house and could have injured or killed someone. The tree service company was irresponsible for performing that work. You should report them to the city that grants them a license. You might get your side of the tree taken out at their expense, for having jeopardized you in that way. One of the reasons they get to charge so much, is for having professional judgement and exercising it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2017, 07:42 AM
 
Location: Seminole, FL
569 posts, read 1,054,466 times
Reputation: 445
Quote:
Originally Posted by cully View Post
Well, that was a rotten thing of your neighbor to do. Unless you had told him you could absolutely not do it and he just felt he had to go ahead a protect his house and get his insurance. Still a bad thing for him to do leaving those branches on your side, thereby damaging your home.

I agree with TexasHorseLady. Go check out those roots you are talking about. Did they really get cut into?
Just to clear a few things up: my home is not yet damaged, just at greater risk and they neither removed any roots nor cut the tree in half. That part was a hypothetical asking where the line is drawn about what you can do with your property that impacts the safety of your neighbor. Can you dig a drainage ditch in your yard that protects your home but floods your neighbor's? Can you setup a high voltage electric fence on the edge of your property next to an unfenced neighbor that has kids that could run up and touch it? There's got to be lines somewhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cully View Post
So this guy left a tree with obvious branches on your side and not on his. Do you know the company he used...odd they didn't warn him of what could happen.
I do know the company he used. I could contact them, but I'm not sure to what affect. They'll obviously deny any wrong doing and claim that it in no way destabilizes the tree or endangers my property. For that matter, how do I even determine if the original company was telling the truth or just trying to get more $ by having us both go in for a $4k job instead of a $1500 one?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cully View Post
Also, you now mention $3-4k you will have to spend on it. Yet you had a quote of $4k for the whole tree. What happened there?
The first guy quoted $4k for the whole tree. I'm guessing it will be slightly less now since 1/3 of it is gone, including a part that hung over someone's house, so there is less work to do. Simply trimming my side is not an option since that would leave an unprotected trunk.

Quote:
Thing is, now it may be you who has that insurance company problem with the tree leaning your way.

PS Take some good pix for future ref just in case.
Yep... Though strangely my insurance company didn't seem concerned one bit about the tree in the first place even with large branches hanging over both my roof and our cars at the time (we've since trimmed the ones hanging over our cars). I don't know if it's visibly bad enough to cause alarm. It basically had 3 main sub trunks - 1 over my neighbor's house, 1 over mine, and 1 toward the street. The one over my neighbor's house is essentially gone. The tree looks lopsided but not on the verge of falling. However, considering what the contractor said and that most of the weight is now toward my property, that's why I'm concerned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FloridaHappy View Post
Is any of it on the right of way of a utility company like your electric provider? We had a live oak tree die inside our fence, but it was still on the electric company's right of way and they had it removed and paid for it. Might be worth a try!
I honestly don't know. It's worth a shot I suppose. The water meters are right at the base of the trunk, though I don't know why they'd care about stuff happening above ground, and there's a street light that one of the big remaining branches leans over. If I were them I'd be concerned about the tree, or at least the branch, falling on the street light. However, could they just serve me a notice that I have to have it removed?

Quote:
Originally Posted by oldtrader View Post
Lets look at known facts:

1: The neighbor came to you and told you, that the tree had to go. You made no offer, to pay for half the costs to take it down, even after the tree service told you the tree was dying and needed to go. You were not concerned enough to be part of the cutting the tree back, so you signaled him that you were not going to do anything, so it forced him to act on his property.
While somewhat true, to be accurate: when we were talking to the contractor, I told them both I was interested but didn't have much money at the time because of all the life events that had just happened. I asked the neighbor to let me know the quote when he got it and we'd see if we could work something out. He didn't tell me until I asked him about it a week or so later, which is when he told me the $4k+. And it's true that I couldn't write a $2k+ check at the time, but he had already decided that was too much and left me with the impression he was going to look into different insurance or at least a cheaper rate to cut it down. I didn't hear from him again and then the company showed up the other day and started cutting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oldtrader View Post
2: The neighbor had the part of the tree that was on his property removed as is his right. He had no right to take the tree clear out, as half the tree was on your property and when a problem was presented to you, you did nothing or make an offer to pay for half the removal of the whole tree, or even give him permission to cut the whole tree down. A person has the right to cut what is on their side of the property line especially a tree that was in the process of dying, which he did to protect his property.
No one asked for permission to cut it down. I certainly would have given that and had expressed interest in having it removed when we were talking with the contractor. I simply couldn't afford an even split of the amount the neighbor was quoted.

As for how much of the tree is on his property vs mine, I really don't know. The property line is really vague due to the 3+ ft gap between our fences which runs right through the heart of the tree. I just bought the property 2 years ago and he bought his last year, so we don't have much history to go on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oldtrader View Post
3: The remaining part of the tree is on your property. Your neighbor nor the tree company is responsible for any damage the tree does to your property. It was your lack of action, that there is any part of the tree left on your property.

4: It will need to be removed, as it is a danger to your home. It is much more of a danger now, than it had previously been when the other half of the tree was there. Painting the scars is not really going to make a difference under the condition the tree is in. It simply has to go, NOW.

5: If the insurance company knows about the current conditions, they would tell you to take it out immediately, or they would cancel your insurance. In fact they may not have to even pay for damages if the tree falls, as you were aware of the danger and did nothing. No new company would insure the home, with the existing problem.

6: For the safety of your home, you have to act now and that tree has to go.
Unfortunately, I don't have $4k laying around. If absolutely necessary, I could maybe scrounge it up selling some stocks and completely emptying our savings, but then we'd really be in danger if an accident of any kind happened, I got laid off, etc..


Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve McDonald View Post
This neighbor had an obligation to inform you of what he intended to have this other tree company do and give you an opportunity to deal with it in some way. This unbalancing of the tree might have caused it to immediately topple over onto your house and could have injured or killed someone. The tree service company was irresponsible for performing that work. You should report them to the city that grants them a license. You might get your side of the tree taken out at their expense, for having jeopardized you in that way. One of the reasons they get to charge so much, is for having professional judgement and exercising it.
I feel he had a moral obligation to inform me. I certainly would have informed him and asked if he'd prefer to chip in $x to have it totally removed. Whether or not he had a legal obligation though, I'm not sure. Is there even such a concept from a legal standpoint?

What was done was not so bad as to risk it immediately toppling. The risk is that an entire side of a slowly dying tree is now unprotected from wind and that the balance of weight, and likely falling direction is toward my house. The situation is not so dire that it's likely to fall over without an act of God, like a hurricane, but it is at much higher risk of doing so should something like that happen..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2017, 08:23 AM
 
Location: Saint John, IN
11,583 posts, read 6,704,273 times
Reputation: 14786
First, $4k seems really high for tree removal, but could be the norm in your area. Around here it would be around $2500. Obviously if branches are endangering your home they need to be cut. Your insurance company WILL have an issue with this if you are aware of a potential a loss that can occur and you did nothing to rectify the problem! They very well could deny a claim do to this.


If you purchased the property 2 years ago then you should have a survey showing where the property lines are. If part of that tree is in fact in your yard then you will need to take care of it. If it is no,t then you need to show that to your neighbor and he will need to correct it the remaining problem areas.


A person can not create a situation that can endanger another individual or impact a loss to property; however, the neighbor DID make you aware of the situation and you did not act on it. Therefore if the remainder of the tree is in fact in your yard, it will be your responsibility to fix the problem as he did his part notifying you of the potential danger. At that point I believe he is no longer legally responsible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2017, 09:02 AM
 
Location: Central Texas
20,958 posts, read 45,301,933 times
Reputation: 24740
Quote:
Originally Posted by wsamon View Post
Just to clear a few things up: my home is not yet damaged, just at greater risk and they neither removed any roots nor cut the tree in half. That part was a hypothetical asking where the line is drawn about what you can do with your property that impacts the safety of your neighbor. Can you dig a drainage ditch in your yard that protects your home but floods your neighbor's? Can you setup a high voltage electric fence on the edge of your property next to an unfenced neighbor that has kids that could run up and touch it? There's got to be lines somewhere.


I do know the company he used. I could contact them, but I'm not sure to what affect. They'll obviously deny any wrong doing and claim that it in no way destabilizes the tree or endangers my property. For that matter, how do I even determine if the original company was telling the truth or just trying to get more $ by having us both go in for a $4k job instead of a $1500 one?


The first guy quoted $4k for the whole tree. I'm guessing it will be slightly less now since 1/3 of it is gone, including a part that hung over someone's house, so there is less work to do. Simply trimming my side is not an option since that would leave an unprotected trunk.


Yep... Though strangely my insurance company didn't seem concerned one bit about the tree in the first place even with large branches hanging over both my roof and our cars at the time (we've since trimmed the ones hanging over our cars). I don't know if it's visibly bad enough to cause alarm. It basically had 3 main sub trunks - 1 over my neighbor's house, 1 over mine, and 1 toward the street. The one over my neighbor's house is essentially gone. The tree looks lopsided but not on the verge of falling. However, considering what the contractor said and that most of the weight is now toward my property, that's why I'm concerned.


I honestly don't know. It's worth a shot I suppose. The water meters are right at the base of the trunk, though I don't know why they'd care about stuff happening above ground, and there's a street light that one of the big remaining branches leans over. If I were them I'd be concerned about the tree, or at least the branch, falling on the street light. However, could they just serve me a notice that I have to have it removed?


While somewhat true, to be accurate: when we were talking to the contractor, I told them both I was interested but didn't have much money at the time because of all the life events that had just happened. I asked the neighbor to let me know the quote when he got it and we'd see if we could work something out. He didn't tell me until I asked him about it a week or so later, which is when he told me the $4k+. And it's true that I couldn't write a $2k+ check at the time, but he had already decided that was too much and left me with the impression he was going to look into different insurance or at least a cheaper rate to cut it down. I didn't hear from him again and then the company showed up the other day and started cutting.


No one asked for permission to cut it down. I certainly would have given that and had expressed interest in having it removed when we were talking with the contractor. I simply couldn't afford an even split of the amount the neighbor was quoted.

As for how much of the tree is on his property vs mine, I really don't know. The property line is really vague due to the 3+ ft gap between our fences which runs right through the heart of the tree. I just bought the property 2 years ago and he bought his last year, so we don't have much history to go on.


Unfortunately, I don't have $4k laying around. If absolutely necessary, I could maybe scrounge it up selling some stocks and completely emptying our savings, but then we'd really be in danger if an accident of any kind happened, I got laid off, etc..



I feel he had a moral obligation to inform me. I certainly would have informed him and asked if he'd prefer to chip in $x to have it totally removed. Whether or not he had a legal obligation though, I'm not sure. Is there even such a concept from a legal standpoint?

What was done was not so bad as to risk it immediately toppling. The risk is that an entire side of a slowly dying tree is now unprotected from wind and that the balance of weight, and likely falling direction is toward my house. The situation is not so dire that it's likely to fall over without an act of God, like a hurricane, but it is at much higher risk of doing so should something like that happen..
Get another estimate now from a third company and talk to them about the first estimate for the whole tree. That's really what should have been done by both you and the neighbor (three estimates) the first time around, but now you can still get an idea of if what you were told is true and how much risk you're in now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2017, 09:07 AM
 
519 posts, read 581,086 times
Reputation: 986
Personally I would suck it up and deal with the tree at this point. The last thing you want to start is a "feud" with your neighbor over this. The cost of dealing with the tree will pale in comparison to that "bill".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2017, 09:20 AM
 
Location: Seminole, FL
569 posts, read 1,054,466 times
Reputation: 445
Quote:
Originally Posted by CGab View Post
First, $4k seems really high for tree removal, but could be the norm in your area. Around here it would be around $2500. Obviously if branches are endangering your home they need to be cut. Your insurance company WILL have an issue with this if you are aware of a potential a loss that can occur and you did nothing to rectify the problem! They very well could deny a claim do to this.


If you purchased the property 2 years ago then you should have a survey showing where the property lines are. If part of that tree is in fact in your yard then you will need to take care of it. If it is no,t then you need to show that to your neighbor and he will need to correct it the remaining problem areas.


A person can not create a situation that can endanger another individual or impact a loss to property; however, the neighbor DID make you aware of the situation and you did not act on it. Therefore if the remainder of the tree is in fact in your yard, it will be your responsibility to fix the problem as he did his part notifying you of the potential danger. At that point I believe he is no longer legally responsible.
I'll have to look into the survey. I vaguely remember getting one but it being unclear as to the exact location of the tree in regards to my property.

I don't know if that cost is high or low for the area. I suppose I'll have to get some quotes. I'm not surprised that it's expensive though. The trunk is close to 4 feet in diameter, its got branches that overhang (at the time) 2 houses and a streetlight, and if you cut down the whole thing it would probably hit someone's house no matter what direction it fell (even across the street), so it would need to be taken down in pieces. Even for the work my neighbor did they used a cherry picker, crane and a crew of about 6 people.

This might be splitting hairs and unimportant legally, but he notified me of the original quote from the original contractor (after I sought him out) and that he decided not to follow through on the service. He never notified me of finding another contractor or proceeding to have the tree cut, and never gave me a chance to jump in and pay my part to have the whole thing removed by that new contractor.

The proceedings went something like:
(original contractor knocks on my door)

[contractor]"your neighbor is looking to trim the branches over his house. Look here." (shows me a few things) "this tree is dying and should probably be removed entirely. It's OK as is for the time being, but removing the branches over his yard will reduce its stability and expose the weakened tree and remaining branches to strong winds that may be a danger to your house. Maybe you two could split the cost of removing it?"

[me] "If something's going to be done I'd definitely be interested in just removing the whole thing, but I don't have much money right now because we've had a lot of major life events in the last few years that we're paying off." (to the neighbor) "I've got to run back to work for a meeting but let me know what the quote is and we'll see if we can work something out."

(a week goes by and no word at all, then I see him outside and ask about the quote to remove the whole tree)

[neighbor] "a little over $4000." (rolls eyes)

[me] "Wow, that's a lot..."

[neighbor] "Yeah... I'm not doing it. My insurance says they won't cover me if I don't get something done though because that branch could fall on our house"

[me] "Weird. I know my insurance doesn't even care about that tree being there at all, and I've got branches over my house. Maybe you should check other insurance companies."

[neighbor] "Yeah, I'll have to look into my options"

(a week(?) goes by and I hear nothing at all)
a company shows up and cuts down not only the main offending branch but several others and most of the sub trunk as mentioned previously (plus some work on other trees around his property that ended up destroying my internet line).

That's where I am now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2017, 09:33 AM
 
Location: Seminole, FL
569 posts, read 1,054,466 times
Reputation: 445
Quote:
Originally Posted by larsm View Post
Personally I would suck it up and deal with the tree at this point. The last thing you want to start is a "feud" with your neighbor over this. The cost of dealing with the tree will pale in comparison to that "bill".
Sadly, it's not about the willingness to suck it up at this point, but rather the ability to do so. Assuming the end result is that I'd have to pay $4k to have it removed, am I better off doing that, leaving our bank accounts completely empty and unable to pay any unforeseen bills, such as medical (with a newborn and a toddler), auto, home repairs, etc. and completely at risk of losing everything should I lose my job (not expected, but my company was just acquired); or am I better off maintaining that minimal financial safety net and risking the possibility of something happening with the tree while we save up for a year or whatever to have it removed. I'm not asking anyone here to answer that, just saying that's the position I'm in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2017, 12:53 PM
 
Location: Tennessee at last!
1,884 posts, read 3,022,287 times
Reputation: 3861
Quote:
Originally Posted by wsamon View Post
Sadly, it's not about the willingness to suck it up at this point, but rather the ability to do so. Assuming the end result is that I'd have to pay $4k to have it removed, am I better off doing that, leaving our bank accounts completely empty and unable to pay any unforeseen bills, such as medical (with a newborn and a toddler), auto, home repairs, etc. and completely at risk of losing everything should I lose my job (not expected, but my company was just acquired); or am I better off maintaining that minimal financial safety net and risking the possibility of something happening with the tree while we save up for a year or whatever to have it removed. I'm not asking anyone here to answer that, just saying that's the position I'm in.
Maybe take the middle ground. Do not remove the whole tree either, just remove the part that could fall on your house. Leave the main trunk. That protects your family from the tree falling on the house and killing someone. Have the kids play in the yard away from where the tree could fall. When you save enough, then remove the main trunk. Or let it stay...maybe it will then fall towards your neighbor's fence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Real Estate

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:48 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top