Neighbours weeds - please advise....
Russell Eberhardt
wrote:
>Our garden at the front adjoins our neighbours with an invisible boundary.
>(We are on a new estate which is open plan at the front of the houses). Our
>garden is now being threatened by his relentlessly rampant weeds and they
>are now an eyesore. We have dropped hints and then asked more
>straightforwardly if he can do anything to improve things. By coincidence,
>at the time we asked, he said he was selling up. He has now put the house on
>the market and he is in the far east. Where do we stand with this? Can we
>notify the estate agent of the problem with any hope that it will get
>sorted?
>Any new owner is not going to have weeding the garden at the top of his list
>of things to do. It is an eyesore and is also spoiling the look of our
>garden and the frontage generally.
>Any advice gratefully received,
>
>Thank you
>
>S
>
>
Not much useful advise seems to have been forthcoming. Is there
really nothing that can be done in law? At what point, if any, can
something be done?
My next door neighbour hasn't touched his garden for over two years.
The stinging nettles are now 5ft high and the brambles are about 8ft
high and arching over the 6ft fence into my garden. Can I insist that
he stops his weeds, and their seeds, trespassing on my property?
Russell.
TO REPLY BY EMAIL:
Change nospam in reply address to iee
AndyX2
Couldn't you offer to do it for him, then just spray it with some
heave duty weedkiller?
Andy
Pete
for him/her? I'm sure if you spoke to the estate agent, they'd be only too
keen for you to improve the tidiness of the property frontage, especially if
you stress that you're not looking for monetary reward. I'd consider giving
them a letter confirming your intended actions and stating that you accept
liability only in respect of yourself and not in any way for the neighbour's
property.
This, in addition to exercising your rights to trim back anything
overgrowing the boundary onto your property.
Of course, any plant material from your neighbour's garden is legally his,
so you should dispose of it through his dustbin.
Pete
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peter Ansbro Proof-reading - adding quality for you
Website: www.the-proof-reader.co.uk
Email: pete....@virgin.net
Tel: 07974404749
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Life isn't a rehearsal - as far as we know!
Bob Brenchley.
wrote:
>If the neighbour's away, why not be a good neighbour and tidy up the garden
Because that would be criminal damage.
>for him/her? I'm sure if you spoke to the estate agent, they'd be only too
>keen for you to improve the tidiness of the property frontage, especially if
>you stress that you're not looking for monetary reward. I'd consider giving
>them a letter confirming your intended actions and stating that you accept
>liability only in respect of yourself and not in any way for the neighbour's
>property.
Oh yes, I can just see them going for that. "Let me free on your
client's land but I'm not liable if I do anything wrong."
>
>This, in addition to exercising your rights to trim back anything
>overgrowing the boundary onto your property.
This you can do provided that you return any fruit to the neighbour.
>
>Of course, any plant material from your neighbour's garden is legally his,
>so you should dispose of it through his dustbin.
IIUC it is only the fruit that is his.
--
Bob.
God: Whew! I just created a 24-hour period of alternating light and
darkness on Earth.
Angel: What are you going to do now?
God: I think I'll call it a day.
Peter J King
> On Mon, 5 Jun 2000 14:43:16 +0100, "Pete" <pete....@virgin.net>
> wrote:
>
> >If the neighbour's away, why not be a good neighbour and tidy up the garden
>
> Because that would be criminal damage.
Why? Only if *damage* were done, surely (hence the term...).
> >for him/her? I'm sure if you spoke to the estate agent, they'd be only too
> >keen for you to improve the tidiness of the property frontage, especially if
> >you stress that you're not looking for monetary reward. I'd consider giving
> >them a letter confirming your intended actions and stating that you accept
> >liability only in respect of yourself and not in any way for the neighbour's
> >property.
>
> Oh yes, I can just see them going for that. "Let me free on your
> client's land but I'm not liable if I do anything wrong."
Estate agents would be very likely to go along with some such offer --
I'm hoiuse hunting at the moment, and a neighbour has often been
responsible for keeping the garden tidy (at least once when the owner was
dead). Gardens often sell houses.
> >This, in addition to exercising your rights to trim back anything
> >overgrowing the boundary onto your property.
>
> This you can do provided that you return any fruit to the neighbour.
> >[...]
> IIUC it is only the fruit that is his.
No, it's anything that's cut.
The original questioner would be a lot better off getting advice from
someone who knows the law, rather than from a Usenet group (asking the
estate agents wouldn't hurt). I'd take advice about pruning, propagating,
etc., from this group (and even then there are almost always conflicting
messages, generally equally confident, and perhaps equally accurate), but
when it comes to the law I'd rather flip a coin...
Peter J. King
--
| <http://users.ox.ac.uk/~worc0337> |
| Philosophy resources & much more. |
| Join the Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail: |
| <http://www.cauce.org/index.html> |
Peter J King
Oops, I've just noticed that my last reply was to a message cross-posted
to uk.legal. I should emphasise that my remarks concerned
uk.rec.gardening; I've no idea about the quality of legal advice from the
former Usenet group (ouch! I've just sprained my fingers from crossing
them too hard...).
Trevor Rimmer
worth checking to see if there is a covenant on the gardens at the
front to compel one to keep them tidy. There are some blisteringly
stupid rules on my parents new house - including an insitence that
they maintain the existing planting for 5 years and replace any dead
shrubs (of which several look sick because of incompetent drainage
(cheap thin plastic land drainage pipes through brick quality clay).
Our house, 12 years old, has restrictions of this sort, including a
limit to hedge heights at the front to 1.8m. So Leylandicide was justified.
Regards
Trev R
Chris French and Helen Johnson
t.Publications.ukf.net> writes
>>so you should dispose of it through his dustbin.
>
>
--
Chris French and Helen Johnson, Leeds
urg Suppliers and References FAQ:
http://www.spennithorne.demon.co.uk/garden/urg/urgrefs.html
mikecrowe
Helen Johnson <news...@spennithorne.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>>IIUC it is only the fruit that is his.
>>
>No, any branches, etc. removed should be offered to the neighbour
Everything removed must be returned to your neighbour, UNLESS, unless
the fruit has 'Fallen' onto your garden. Just because it is on a branch
overhanging your garden, it is no excuse to pick it. Wait for it to
fall!!
Mike
Michael 'Mike' Crowe
RN Shipmates, the system for finding Royal Navy 'oppos'.
H.M.S.Collingwood Association for all ex Collingwoods
mikecrowe
<reber...@nospam.org> writes
>On Fri, 26 May 2000 18:34:34 +0100, "Sandy" <xxa...@x-stream.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>Our garden at the front adjoins our neighbours with an invisible boundary.
>>(We are on a new estate which is open plan at the front of the houses). Our
>>garden is now being threatened by his relentlessly rampant weeds and they
>>are now an eyesore. We have dropped hints and then asked more
>>straightforwardly if he can do anything to improve things. By coincidence,
>>at the time we asked, he said he was selling up. He has now put the house on
>>the market and he is in the far east. Where do we stand with this? Can we
>>notify the estate agent of the problem with any hope that it will get
>>sorted?
A good few years back, I bought a house with a very large garden. This
house and garden had stood unattended for well over a year. The
neighbours told me that 'they exercised their right and cleared the
weeds back beyond the boundary and into the garden by a yard'
>>Any new owner is not going to have weeding the garden at the top of his list
>>of things to do. It is an eyesore and is also spoiling the look of our
>>garden and the frontage generally.
He may be a keen gardener and accept the challenge. There are a few
strange folk about;-) like us when we took on the above house! (Just got
it sorted out and moved to a bigger house and a bigger garden!!)
>>
>Not much useful advise seems to have been forthcoming. Is there
>really nothing that can be done in law? At what point, if any, can
>something be done?
>
>My next door neighbour hasn't touched his garden for over two years.
>The stinging nettles are now 5ft high and the brambles are about 8ft
>high and arching over the 6ft fence into my garden. Can I insist that
>he stops his weeds, and their seeds, trespassing on my property?
>
Solicitor's letters work wonders. BUT, it may be putting the cart before
the horse and don't expect toooooooooooooo much co-operation after. You
do have a right somewhere, not sure where.
Norman Wells
t.Publications.ukf.net> writes
>On Mon, 5 Jun 2000 14:43:16 +0100, "Pete" <pete....@virgin.net>
>wrote:
>
>
>Because that would be criminal damage.
>
why would it be 'criminal'?
--
Norman Wells
Norman Wells
Peter J King <shil...@ermine.ox.ac.uk> writes
>
>Oops, I've just noticed that my last reply was to a message cross-posted
>to uk.legal. I should emphasise that my remarks concerned
>uk.rec.gardening; I've no idea about the quality of legal advice from the
>former Usenet group (ouch! I've just sprained my fingers from crossing
>them too hard...).
>
> Peter J. King
>
advice about pruning is pretty dodgy too.
--
Norman Wells
Pete
garden could be construed as criminal damage. What a sad, litigious place
some people live in! Some people eh? - you can't give 'em chocolate!
That being so,
1. If in doubt, don't follow my suggestion.
2. Don't stop to consider that tidying the front garden will, in one fell
swoop, ease the job of the estate agent, keep the neighbour's and your
garden looking more presentable than they would otherwise be and convey the
image of a good neighbourhood where people watch out for each other.
Jon Rouse
>
>Solicitor's letters work wonders. BUT, it may be putting the cart before
>the horse and don't expect toooooooooooooo much co-operation after. You
>do have a right somewhere, not sure where.
If he is trying to sell the house, just threatening to ask your solicitor to
send a letter should be enough, there's nothing like a neighbour dispute to
scare off prospective purchasers.
--
The views expressed are my own, and may not necessarily reflect those of my
employer.
Peter McLelland
do the work they will almost certainly get approval.
Peter
M.J.Powell
<mikecrowe....@mikecrowe.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <BWCK$nBggF...@spennithorne.demon.co.uk>, Chris French and
>Helen Johnson <news...@spennithorne.demon.co.uk> writes
>>
>>>IIUC it is only the fruit that is his.
>>>
>>No, any branches, etc. removed should be offered to the neighbour
>
>Everything removed must be returned to your neighbour, UNLESS, unless
>the fruit has 'Fallen' onto your garden. Just because it is on a branch
>overhanging your garden, it is no excuse to pick it. Wait for it to
>fall!!
Am I allowed to just nudge it?
Mike
--
M.J.Powell
Ruth Hine
news:0dODuDAA...@myard.demon.co.uk...
Whether you like the plants which have been left to run to seed on his
property, they are growing on another's property and, as such, they are
probably his property. You may think that by pruning or weeding etc you are
improving things but, as you are altering or destroying another's property
it counts as damage. It is classed as criminal damage because, under the
Criminal Damage Act 1971 (Section 1(1)) the destruction or damage of
property belonging to another without lawful authority or excuse is a
criminal offence with a maximum term of imprisonment of 10 years.
BUT NOTE the flowers fruit and/or foliage of a plant growing wild on land
are not, themselves, property. Therefore, as far as weeds are concerned,
although you can't destroy the *whole* plant you are entitled to prune.
HOWEVER going onto his property in any event would be trespass which is not
a CRIMINAL offence but can lay you open to a CIVIL claim for damages if you
damage or remove anything.
Bet you are all glad you asked for a legal point of view!
--
Ruth Hine
Speak softly and carry a copy of Archbold
Norman Wells
<hi...@btinternet.com> writes
>
>Whether you like the plants which have been left to run to seed on his
>property, they are growing on another's property and, as such, they are
>probably his property. You may think that by pruning or weeding etc you are
>improving things but, as you are altering or destroying another's property
>it counts as damage. It is classed as criminal damage because, under the
>Criminal Damage Act 1971 (Section 1(1)) the destruction or damage of
>property belonging to another without lawful authority or excuse is a
>criminal offence with a maximum term of imprisonment of 10 years.
>
>BUT NOTE the flowers fruit and/or foliage of a plant growing wild on land
>are not, themselves, property. Therefore, as far as weeds are concerned,
>although you can't destroy the *whole* plant you are entitled to prune.
>
property when it seems (from your statement that you are not allowed to
destroy the whole plant) that the whole of the weed is? And how come
you are not committing criminal damage by altering the neighbours
property (ie his whole weed plants) by pruning them?
Are you saying that you can prune the weeds but not the non-weeds? If
so, how do you distinguish between the two, when all are now growing
wild?
>HOWEVER going onto his property in any event would be trespass which is not
>a CRIMINAL offence but can lay you open to a CIVIL claim for damages if you
>damage or remove anything.
>
>Bet you are all glad you asked for a legal point of view!
Yes, I am. Thank you.
Would the shooting of someone else's cat on your own property also be
criminal damage do you think? Can a cat be property?
--
Norman Wells
Bob Brenchley.
<shil...@ermine.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
>On Mon, 5 Jun 2000, Bob Brenchley. wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 5 Jun 2000 14:43:16 +0100, "Pete" <pete....@virgin.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >If the neighbour's away, why not be a good neighbour and tidy up the garden
>>
>> Because that would be criminal damage.
>
>Why? Only if *damage* were done, surely (hence the term...).
Because it may be damage in the eyes of the owner of the property.
What right has one person got to interfere in the garden belonging to
another person?
I happen to hate certain types of flowers - should I come into your
garden and rip them out of the ground because your taste in flowers
offends mine? No. Of course not.
I keep a patch of brambles at the bottom of my garden as a natural
defense against burglars. I'm sure many people will classify this as
very bad gardening and want to spray them with weedkiller.
As I've said before. One man's weed......
>
>> >for him/her? I'm sure if you spoke to the estate agent, they'd be only too
>> >keen for you to improve the tidiness of the property frontage, especially if
>> >you stress that you're not looking for monetary reward. I'd consider giving
>> >them a letter confirming your intended actions and stating that you accept
>> >liability only in respect of yourself and not in any way for the neighbour's
>> >property.
>>
>> Oh yes, I can just see them going for that. "Let me free on your
>> client's land but I'm not liable if I do anything wrong."
>
>Estate agents would be very likely to go along with some such offer --
Read the offer above again. NO estate agent with two brain cells to
rub together would accept.
>I'm hoiuse hunting at the moment, and a neighbour has often been
>responsible for keeping the garden tidy (at least once when the owner was
>dead). Gardens often sell houses.
This may be true, but not on the above basis.
>
>> >This, in addition to exercising your rights to trim back anything
>> >overgrowing the boundary onto your property.
>>
>> This you can do provided that you return any fruit to the neighbour.
>> >[...]
>> IIUC it is only the fruit that is his.
>
>No, it's anything that's cut.
I think the wording of the law is that someone can cut back a branch
which overhangs their property provided that the fruit is returned to
the owner.
There may be other laws, this is just the wording I remember.
>
--
Bob.
A fight to the death between zombies has a few inherent problems.
Norman Wells
t.Publications.ukf.net> writes
>On Mon, 5 Jun 2000 22:44:48 +0100, Peter J King
><shil...@ermine.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 5 Jun 2000, Bob Brenchley. wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 5 Jun 2000 14:43:16 +0100, "Pete" <pete....@virgin.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >If the neighbour's away, why not be a good neighbour and tidy up the garden
>>>
>>> Because that would be criminal damage.
>>
>>Why? Only if *damage* were done, surely (hence the term...).
>
>Because it may be damage in the eyes of the owner of the property.
>
dictates what is damage, not the individual.
>What right has one person got to interfere in the garden belonging to
>another person?
>
The general principle in the UK, as I understand it, is that you are
free to do anything that is not specified by law to be illegal. All we
are trying to do is establish under which law, and to what extent,
interference in someone else's garden may be illegal.
>I happen to hate certain types of flowers - should I come into your
>garden and rip them out of the ground because your taste in flowers
>offends mine? No. Of course not.
The original enquiry concerned a garden that had been left untended for
a considerable period. Is it your view that its neighbour can and
should do absolutely nothing to it regardless of the state it gets into,
and of the effect it may have on its surroundings, including the
possibility of reducing property prices by being derelict and generally
unsightly, spreading weed seeds etc into the neighbour's property, and
encouraging vermin and possibly drug takers?
--
Norman Wells
Jason Clifford
> Stick a few cannabis plants in the neighbour's garden one dark night. Next
> day make an anonymous call to the local nick. They'll be round in a flash
> to remove everything in the garden. They'll probably dig it over too.
Are we all to take it that you are offering to supply the cannabis plants
for this purpose?
Sharon Curtis
Trevor Rimmer <tri...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
>Our house, 12 years old, has restrictions of this sort, including a
>limit to hedge heights at the front to 1.8m. So Leylandicide was justified.
I am contemplating leylandicide; the house I'm buying has a complete
ring of 8ft tall (chopped across the top) confiers that I think are
leylandii, all around the edge of the garden. Blocks a lot of light
and takes up a lot of space. I wonder if there are likely to be
"tree orders" that say I can't get rid of them?
Sharon
Nick Maclaren
Vanishingly unlikely. I would just get rid of them.
Regards,
Nick Maclaren,
University of Cambridge Computing Service,
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QG, England.
Email: nm...@cam.ac.uk
Tel.: +44 1223 334761 Fax: +44 1223 334679
Sharon Curtis
Nick Maclaren <nm...@cus.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>In article <8hlgfb$s46$1...@peseta.cs.stir.ac.uk>, s...@peseta.cs.stir.ac.uk (Sharon Curtis) writes:
>|> In article <200006060...@zetnet.co.uk>,
>|> Trevor Rimmer <tri...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
>|> >Our house, 12 years old, has restrictions of this sort, including a
>|> >limit to hedge heights at the front to 1.8m. So Leylandicide was justified.
>|>
>|> I am contemplating leylandicide; the house I'm buying has a complete
>|> ring of 8ft tall (chopped across the top) confiers that I think are
>|> leylandii, all around the edge of the garden. Blocks a lot of light
>|> and takes up a lot of space. I wonder if there are likely to be
>|> "tree orders" that say I can't get rid of them.
>
>Vanishingly unlikely.
Oh good. Then I'll pluck up the courage to go and check...
> I would just get rid of them.
I was going to ask the neighbours first. The trees will be mine, not
theirs, but they might have an opinion about what sort of thing they
would/wouldn't like there (who am I kidding, they'll probably jump for
joy at the thought of no more roots invading!!!). Being a nice neighbour
and all that...
Sharon
John Neale Baraclough
from s...@peseta.cs.stir.ac.uk (Sharon Curtis) contains these words:
> I was going to ask the neighbours first. The trees will be mine, not
> theirs, but they might have an opinion about what sort of thing they
> would/wouldn't like there (who am I kidding, they'll probably jump for
> joy at the thought of no more roots invading!!!). Being a nice neighbour
> and all that...
What if they say "Please keep the lovely trees" ? Then you're
stuck with a choice of being a nice neighbour with a circle of
leylandii, or a nasty selfish one. I'd cut the trees down,(before the
neighbour has time to ring the council) and then discuss what might
be planted next .
Janet
mikecrowe
<mi...@pickmere.demon.co.uk> writes
>Everything removed must be returned to your neighbour, UNLESS, unless
>>the fruit has 'Fallen' onto your garden. Just because it is on a branch
>>overhanging your garden, it is no excuse to pick it. Wait for it to
>>fall!!
>
>Am I allowed to just nudge it?
>
Another Mike
mikecrowe
<s...@peseta.cs.stir.ac.uk> writes
>
>I am contemplating leylandicide; the house I'm buying has a complete
>ring of 8ft tall (chopped across the top) confiers that I think are
>leylandii, all around the edge of the garden. Blocks a lot of light
>and takes up a lot of space. I wonder if there are likely to be
>
It is VERY unlikely that a TPO is placed or has been placed on these
overgrown weeds. A very quick check cannot find any.
Kay Easton
<nor...@myard.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>The original enquiry concerned a garden that had been left untended for
>a considerable period. Is it your view that its neighbour can and
>should do absolutely nothing to it regardless of the state it gets into,
>and of the effect it may have on its surroundings, including the
>possibility of reducing property prices by being derelict
AFAIK, there is no requirement in english law that you should maintain
your property in a condition suitable to enhance your neighbours'
property values!
--
Kay Easton
Edward's earthworm page:
http://www.scarboro.demon.co.uk/garden/
Andy Mabbett
>>
>> Because that would be criminal damage.
>
>Why? Only if *damage* were done, surely (hence the term...).
Hmmm...
"I have been studying the natural history of the bramble-
specific wibble moth for 20 years; you have just destroyed all
my research. That will be GBP [lots] compensation, please".
--
Andy Mabbett
You imagine you can change the World. And you're right.
** Please note my new e-mail address **
Andy Mabbett
>are not, themselves, property.
Does the law offer definition of "growing wild"?
Paul C
<2000060705301...@nym.alias.net>, Isaac Hunt wrote
>Not bad but where's the creativity?
>
>Stick a few cannabis plants in the neighbour's garden one dark night. Next
>day make an anonymous call to the local nick. They'll be round in a flash
>to remove everything in the garden. They'll probably dig it over too.
Tell them there's a body buried there and they may do the lawn too.
Paul
--
email: meagai...@hotmail.com
Put out the fire to email me :-)
Bob Brenchley.
<nor...@myard.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>Because it may be damage in the eyes of the owner of the property.
>>
>Lots of things upset other people without being illegal. The law
>dictates what is damage, not the individual.
The law protects a person's property from another person (or at least
it should).
>
>>What right has one person got to interfere in the garden belonging to
>>another person?
>>
>The general principle in the UK, as I understand it, is that you are
>free to do anything that is not specified by law to be illegal. All we
>are trying to do is establish under which law, and to what extent,
>interference in someone else's garden may be illegal.
Because it is not YOUR property - it is someone else's. The law
protects the owner's right NOT to have YOU do just what YOU want with
HIS property. (not getting at you personally you understand).
>
>>I happen to hate certain types of flowers - should I come into your
>>garden and rip them out of the ground because your taste in flowers
>>offends mine? No. Of course not.
>
>The original enquiry concerned a garden that had been left untended for
>a considerable period. Is it your view that its neighbour can and
>should do absolutely nothing to it regardless of the state it gets into,
>and of the effect it may have on its surroundings, including the
>possibility of reducing property prices by being derelict and generally
>unsightly, spreading weed seeds etc into the neighbour's property, and
>encouraging vermin and possibly drug takers?
There are laws that deal with vermin, and with drug takers. Apart from
that, yes - that is exactly what I mean. An englishman's home should
be his castle and that includes his garden.
--
Bob.
If all the world is a stage, where is the audience sitting?
Alan Gould
<k...@scarboro.demon.co.uk> writes
>>a considerable period. Is it your view that its neighbour can and
>>should do absolutely nothing to it regardless of the state it gets into,
>>and of the effect it may have on its surroundings, including the
>>possibility of reducing property prices by being derelict
>
>your property in a condition suitable to enhance your neighbours'
>property values!
It might come under similar legislation to noise about public nuisance,
but I can't see any court wanting to deal with it.
--
Alan Gould: <al...@agolincs.demon.co.uk>
Norman Wells
<k...@scarboro.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <jASLcGAt...@myard.demon.co.uk>, Norman Wells
><nor...@myard.demon.co.uk> writes
>>
>>The original enquiry concerned a garden that had been left untended for
>>a considerable period. Is it your view that its neighbour can and
>>should do absolutely nothing to it regardless of the state it gets into,
>>and of the effect it may have on its surroundings, including the
>>possibility of reducing property prices by being derelict
>
>AFAIK, there is no requirement in english law that you should maintain
>your property in a condition suitable to enhance your neighbours'
>property values!
Absolutely right, but it doesn't answer the point I raised. What do you
do *in practice* if your neighbour moves out and abandons his garden to
nature so that it looks derelict and becomes an eyesore, having an
adverse effect on the neighbourhood, reducing the value of your
property, spreading weed seeds in profusion on your garden, attracting
vermin and illicit drug takers?
Can you and should you do absolutely nothing?
--
Norman Wells
Norman Wells
t.Publications.ukf.net> writes
>The law protects a person's property from another person (or at least
>it should).
Maybe it should, but the question is whether it does. Does it?
>Because it is not YOUR property - it is someone else's. The law
>protects the owner's right NOT to have YOU do just what YOU want with
>HIS property. (not getting at you personally you understand).
Maybe the law should do that, but the question is whether it does.
>There are laws that deal with vermin, and with drug takers. Apart from
>that, yes - that is exactly what I mean. An englishman's home should
>be his castle and that includes his garden.
>
Maybe it should be, but the question is whether it is.
--
Norman Wells
David
>
>Whether you like the plants which have been left to run to seed on his
>property, they are growing on another's property and, as such, they are
>probably his property.
> You may think that by pruning or weeding etc you are
>improving things but, as you are altering or destroying another's property
>it counts as damage.
But pruning is in fact improving the property (plant) and certainly not
damaging or destroying, that is why people prune.
> It is classed as criminal damage because, under the
>Criminal Damage Act 1971 (Section 1(1)) the destruction or damage of
>property
But this hasn't been proved, has it, if you only prune which leads to an
improved plant?
>
>BUT NOTE the flowers fruit and/or foliage of a plant growing wild on land
>are not, themselves, property. Therefore, as far as weeds are concerned,
>although you can't destroy the *whole* plant you are entitled to prune.
This doesn't make sense. If the weeds are not property because they are
wild then they can be removed, surely? And if you gave them back to the
owner, via his compost heap, then you wouldn't have removed them would
you?
>
>HOWEVER going onto his property in any event would be trespass which is not
>a CRIMINAL offence but can lay you open to a CIVIL claim for damages if you
>damage or remove anything.
See above, pruning is not damaging, its improving, and removal need not
apply if you return the weeds?
>
>Bet you are all glad you asked for a legal point of view!
Sadly, no :-) As others have said, what a pity life is reduced to this
sort of nonsense when folk are simply trying to be neighbourly and
helpful and keep gardens tidy when owners are absent or unable to do so.
Of course, if you're not a gardener and don't know what to do safely,
then you shouldn't attempt what is beyond your competence.
--
David
David
>>>No, any branches, etc. removed should be offered to the neighbour
>>
>>the fruit has 'Fallen' onto your garden. Just because it is on a branch
>>overhanging your garden, it is no excuse to pick it. Wait for it to
>>fall!!
>
>Am I allowed to just nudge it?
Not until you have cut the overhanging branch off, and before you give
the wood back to the owner :-)
--
David
David
>
> What if they say "Please keep the lovely trees" ? Then you're
>stuck with a choice of being a nice neighbour with a circle of
>leylandii, or a nasty selfish one. I'd cut the trees down,(before the
>neighbour has time to ring the council) and then discuss what might
>be planted next .
If they're only 8ft high then they can't be trees, can they? They're
'dwarfed conifers' :-)
If you found they liked the trees, you could always offer to let them
grow up another 20 or 40 ft or so?
But I'm with Janet for doing the deed with your own shrubs in your own
borders without reference to anyone else, even in terms of what replaces
them.
--
David
Jon Rouse
>I am contemplating leylandicide; the house I'm buying has a complete
>ring of 8ft tall (chopped across the top) confiers that I think are
>leylandii, all around the edge of the garden. Blocks a lot of light
>and takes up a lot of space. I wonder if there are likely to be
>"tree orders" that say I can't get rid of them?
At the moment hedges are exempt from TPOs, though ISTR that a change is
imminent, so get the chainsaw out quickly.
Jon Rouse
>BUT NOTE the flowers fruit and/or foliage of a plant growing wild on land
>are not, themselves, property. Therefore, as far as weeds are concerned,
>although you can't destroy the *whole* plant you are entitled to prune.
If they are growing wild, surely they are covered by the Wildlife and
Countryside Act?
Jon Rouse
>Sadly, no :-) As others have said, what a pity life is reduced to this
>sort of nonsense when folk are simply trying to be neighbourly and
>helpful and keep gardens tidy when owners are absent or unable to do so.
>Of course, if you're not a gardener and don't know what to do safely,
>then you shouldn't attempt what is beyond your competence.
At my last house a neighbour tried to be 'neighbourly' and completely
scalped my lawn which I had deliberately kept long so it wouldn't dry out in
summer. A few weeks later it looked like the Gobi desert.
Alan Gould
<nor...@myard.demon.co.uk> writes
> What do you
>do *in practice* if your neighbour moves out and abandons his garden to
>nature so that it looks derelict and becomes an eyesore, having an
>adverse effect on the neighbourhood, reducing the value of your
>property, spreading weed seeds in profusion on your garden, attracting
>vermin and illicit drug takers?
>
>Can you and should you do absolutely nothing?
You are describing the way we run certain parts of our garden as
ecological naturalising areas. I don't consider them to be either
abandoned, derelict or eyesores. They intermingle very well with more
formal areas, vegetable patches, lawns, flower beds shrubberies etc. in
the same garden. What you can and should do is garden your own patch as
you see fit and leave other people to do the same.
--
Alan & Joan Gould, North Lincs. Life begins every morning.
<al...@agolincs.demon.co.uk>
Adrian Hicks
>>
>> It is classed as criminal damage because, under the
>>Criminal Damage Act 1971 (Section 1(1)) the destruction or damage of
>>property
As I understand there is of course a defence to a charge of criminal
damage if you honestly believe that the owner would if he knew the
circumstances have given you permission to do the damage.
So if you honestly believe he would let you weed then you could.
Note, apparently the honest belief doesn't have to be reasonable - you
just honestly have to believe it.
Adrian
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Sharon Curtis
David <da...@crown-cottage.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>John Neale Baraclough <janet.a...@zetnet.co.uk> writes
>>
>> What if they say "Please keep the lovely trees" ? Then you're
>>stuck with a choice of being a nice neighbour with a circle of
>>leylandii, or a nasty selfish one.
Not at all. I ask what it is about the leylandii they like, if it's
privacy, then that's fine, I'll make sure whatever I put in its
place has privacy, for example. If it is specifically the leylandii
they want then I will very reasonably offer them the whole of the
hedge to move sideways a few foot into their garden. They won't be
in a position to complain when they had every opportunity to keep them.
>If they're only 8ft high then they can't be trees, can they? They're
>'dwarfed conifers' :-)
I thought "dratted" was the right adjective? :)
>But I'm with Janet for doing the deed with your own shrubs in your own
>borders without reference to anyone else, even in terms of what replaces
>them.
Put it this way, I have always had the intention of doing precisely
what I like in my own borders, irrespective of what the neighbours
think, but speaking in practical terms, I am about to do something
that will substantially affect a neighbour's garden. You imagine if
you liked privacy in the garden and had a nice screen of trees down
one side, and then the neighbour cuts them down without even telling
you in advance, and all of a sudden you are visible from three more
gardens! Yes, within the neighbour's rights, but living next
to neighbours is more about having pleasant relations with people who
live just a few feet away, not about asserting rights at the expense
of those relations.
Enquiring as to the neighbours concerns with a view to minimizing their
unhappiness with whatever course of action you decide to take is a very
sensible thing, in my view.
Contrast what happened to the chap with the neighbour's conifer
in a thread a few weeks ago with what happened in my last garden:
The side of my garden bordered on two back gardens of houses in a
nearby road, plus there was a fence midway across my garden. The
two bordering neighbours discussed the replacement of fences at
the back of the border, let me know they were doing so, so there
wasn't any problem with access, did the job themselves with one fence
for the two of them, each sharing half the cost, which saved them a lot
of money, and whilst they were at it they very kindly removed my fence
panel at a t-junction to theirs, that I needed moving!
How's that for good will and cooperation and mutual benefit?
Sharon
Sandy
interest. Basically, I don't want to do anyone elses garden, doing my own is
plenty enough for me - all I want is to have a respectable garden myself,
nothing fancy - and not a garden that is is threatened by overgrown weeds
growing over the boundary and spoiling my frontage.
I respect the right of the owner to do as he wishes to his home and garden
and only ask that he respects my desire to have a respectable garden.
Gardening is not especially my hobby but I do spend money on making it look
nice. Living next door to an eyesore of any sort is not nice and I cannot
help but wonder if i was to try and sell in the future simply because my job
moves me, would this be off putting for prospective buyers.....
We shall have to see.
Sandy
Jeremy
Eberhardt <reber...@nospam.org> writes
>On Fri, 26 May 2000 18:34:34 +0100, "Sandy" <xxa...@x-stream.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>Our garden at the front adjoins our neighbours with an invisible boundary.
>>(We are on a new estate which is open plan at the front of the houses). Our
>>garden is now being threatened by his relentlessly rampant weeds and they
>>are now an eyesore. We have dropped hints and then asked more
>>straightforwardly if he can do anything to improve things. By coincidence,
>>at the time we asked, he said he was selling up. He has now put the house
>on
>>the market and he is in the far east. Where do we stand with this? Can we
>>notify the estate agent of the problem with any hope that it will get
>>sorted?
>>Any new owner is not going to have weeding the garden at the top of his
>list
>>of things to do. It is an eyesore and is also spoiling the look of our
>>garden and the frontage generally.
>>Any advice gratefully received,
>>
>>Thank you
>>
>>S
>>
>>
>Not much useful advise seems to have been forthcoming. Is there
>really nothing that can be done in law? At what point, if any, can
>something be done?
>
>My next door neighbour hasn't touched his garden for over two years.
>The stinging nettles are now 5ft high and the brambles are about 8ft
>high and arching over the 6ft fence into my garden. Can I insist that
>he stops his weeds, and their seeds, trespassing on my property?
>
>Russell.
>TO REPLY BY EMAIL:
>Change nospam in reply address to iee
>
chill out people !
I'd personally be delighted if my neighbours' gardens were like this -
they would provide the wildlife habitats I can't provide in my own
garden and it's the best possible thing to happen to an anaemic
"open plan" estate.
sorry - can't help thinking of those people who poison earthworms
for "daring" to leave lovely casts on their precious lawns.
--
Jeremy
Chris Rayner
<da...@crown-cottage.nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Ruth Hine <hi...@btinternet.com> writes
------------------------------8<---------------------------------------------------------
>But pruning is in fact improving the property (plant) and certainly not
>damaging or destroying, that is why people prune.
------------------------------8<---------------------------------------------------------
You haven't seen me pruning. =:-|
David
>
>I thought "dratted" was the right adjective? :)
>
>
>Put it this way, I have always had the intention of doing precisely
>what I like in my own borders, irrespective of what the neighbours
>think, but speaking in practical terms, I am about to do something
>that will substantially affect a neighbour's garden. You imagine if
>you liked privacy in the garden and had a nice screen of trees down
>one side, and then the neighbour cuts them down without even telling
>you in advance, and all of a sudden you are visible from three more
>gardens! Yes, within the neighbour's rights, but living next
>to neighbours is more about having pleasant relations with people who
>live just a few feet away, not about asserting rights at the expense
>of those relations.
Absolutely spot on, agree with you 100%. I was really commenting on
those kind folk who were recommending getting council 'officials' or law
involved, where they are IME more likely to muddy the waters than solve
the problem.
>
>Enquiring as to the neighbours concerns with a view to minimizing their
>unhappiness with whatever course of action you decide to take is a very
>sensible thing, in my view.
Yes agreed!
>
>Contrast what happened to the chap with the neighbour's conifer
>in a thread a few weeks ago with what happened in my last garden:
>
>The side of my garden bordered on two back gardens of houses in a
>nearby road, plus there was a fence midway across my garden. The
>two bordering neighbours discussed the replacement of fences at
>the back of the border, let me know they were doing so, so there
>wasn't any problem with access, did the job themselves with one fence
>for the two of them, each sharing half the cost, which saved them a lot
>of money, and whilst they were at it they very kindly removed my fence
>panel at a t-junction to theirs, that I needed moving!
>
>How's that for good will and cooperation and mutual benefit?
>
A perfect example of how to live with each other and benefit from mutual
efforts :-)
--
David
Ruth Hine
news:394098d2...@news.ukonline.co.uk...
I didn't write that - as anyone who has seen *my* pruning will confirm.
--
Ruth Hine
Speak softly and carry a copy of Archbold
Chris Rayner
wrote:
I have a brilliant book called something like Simple Pruning by one N.
Catchpole. It was published in about 1947.
Russell Eberhardt
<al...@agolincs.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>You are describing the way we run certain parts of our garden as
>ecological naturalising areas. I don't consider them to be either
>abandoned, derelict or eyesores. They intermingle very well with more
>formal areas, vegetable patches, lawns, flower beds shrubberies etc. in
>the same garden. What you can and should do is garden your own patch as
>you see fit and leave other people to do the same.
>--
Agreed, provided what you do (or don't do) doesn't harm others. I
have wild areas in my garden as well and I wouldn't like an impeccably
manicured garden with no wildlife but . . .
My next door neighbour's "garden" was reasonably presentable when we
moed in ten years ago. It is now two acres of rubbish (scrap wood and
metal, old doors and glass. Brambles, elder, and stinging nettles now
grow through this rubbish such that the brambles are now three feet
higher than the six foot boundary fence (his) which is in imminent
danger of collapse under the weight of rubbish. The brambles arch
over the fence and a hedge, try to take root in my garden, and scratch
me to pieces when I'm cutting the grass. This is a little extreme and
is by no means an _ecological naturalising area. Do I have to put up
with it?
BAC
Russell Eberhardt wrote in message <393b952a...@news.demon.co.uk>...
Why not visit www.lawsolutions.co.uk ? I don't know if this is the kind of
legal problem they can advise on, but I sent them a query on Sunday and
received the promised advice (from a barrister) within the two working days
they promised. And it was free!
That apart, if the neighbour's garden is such a mess, and he's abroad, I
can't see he'd object (or even know) if you were to tidy it up a bit. My
next door but one neighbour's fantastic front garden crop of dandelions
disappeared overnight recently, courtesy of another neighbour sick and tired
of the seeds blowing into his garden.
Michael Berridge
Russell Eberhardt wrote in message <39463c60...@news.demon.co.uk>...
> try complaining to your local Environmental dept at the council, you can
always claim that you think there are rats there. They will have the power
to order the rubbish removed, or AFAIK they can do it and charge the owner.
Mike
Andy Mabbett
<nor...@myard.demon.co.uk> writes
>What do you
>do *in practice* if your neighbour moves out and abandons his garden to
>nature so that it looks derelict and becomes an eyesore, having an
>adverse effect on the neighbourhood, reducing the value of your
>property, spreading weed seeds in profusion on your garden, attracting
>vermin and illicit drug takers?
Try talking to the police, your local councillor(s) and, perhaps, the
local press.
Nick Maclaren
In article <39478578...@news.demon.co.uk>, reber...@nospam.org (Russell Eberhardt) writes:
|> On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 20:55:50 +0100, "BAC" <cass...@dircon.co.uk>
|> wrote:
|>
|> >Why not visit www.lawsolutions.co.uk ? I don't know if this is the kind of
|> >legal problem they can advise on, but I sent them a query on Sunday and
|> >received the promised advice (from a barrister) within the two working days
|> >they promised. And it was free!
|>
I sent them one a couple of weeks back, and have had no response :-)
Admittedly, the one that I sent them was a hard question, and they
are clearly set up to answer only the most bog-standard queries.
But they should have at least responded "Sorry, we can't help."
Regards,
Nick Maclaren,
University of Cambridge Computing Service,
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QG, England.
Email: nm...@cam.ac.uk
Tel.: +44 1223 334761 Fax: +44 1223 334679
Russell Eberhardt
wrote:
>Why not visit www.lawsolutions.co.uk ? I don't know if this is the kind of
>legal problem they can advise on, but I sent them a query on Sunday and
>received the promised advice (from a barrister) within the two working days
>they promised. And it was free!
Thanks, a useful lead.
>That apart, if the neighbour's garden is such a mess, and he's abroad, I
>can't see he'd object (or even know) if you were to tidy it up a bit. My
>next door but one neighbour's fantastic front garden crop of dandelions
>disappeared overnight recently, courtesy of another neighbour sick and tired
>of the seeds blowing into his garden.
Unfortunately he still lives there :-(
BAC
Nick Maclaren wrote in message <8i82i5$q2c$1...@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>...
>|> wrote:
>|>
>|> >Why not visit www.lawsolutions.co.uk ? I don't know if this is the kind
of
>|> >legal problem they can advise on, but I sent them a query on Sunday and
>|> >received the promised advice (from a barrister) within the two working
days
>|> >they promised. And it was free!
>|>
>|> Thanks, a useful lead.
>
>
>Admittedly, the one that I sent them was a hard question, and they
>are clearly set up to answer only the most bog-standard queries.
>But they should have at least responded "Sorry, we can't help."
>
>
Oh dear, I didn't mean to give anyone a bum steer. I was very impressed with
their service, but of course, one swallow does not make a summer. Did you
chase up their non-performance with a reminder?