A legal expert has clarified what householders are permitted to do when a neighbour's tree overhangs their garden. Barrister Daniel Barnett tackled the matter on his LBC programme following a caller's account of a hazardous branch falling onto his property.
Anthony in Gravesend contacted LBC's Legal Hour and informed Daniel Barnett that branches from an adjoining tree had repeatedly fallen into his garden. Anthony described one instance where a branch which recently fell was "about 24ft long" and "about 9in in diameter", noting that it landed "right into the middle of the garden". He told Daniel: "So, you know, pretty dangerous."
The caller said he had repeatedly attempted to resolve the situation with his neighbour, including offering to share the expense of removing the trees. "We've gone halves a couple of times to take his trees away because he won't do anything about it," Anthony explained. "I've offered to pay half a couple of times, you know, take the other ones away, but this one is still really bad and he won't do anything about it."
Anthony also disclosed that the tree was protected, but stated that planning permission had already been approved for it to be felled because the council determined it was dangerous. Nevertheless, despite the approval being granted, the neighbour was still declining to remove it.
Daniel informed the caller that there was little the law could do to compel action before damage actually took place. "You cannot compel your neighbour to cut down that tree," he stated. "If the tree falls down and damages your house, you can sue them for the damage, but you can't compel them to cut down the tree."
The barrister proceeded to clarify what property owners are legally permitted to do should branches extend across the boundary line. He said: "What you can do, Anthony - and this is unsatisfactory, but this is what the law says - is that if you imagine a vertical line upwards from the dividing line on your properties, say your garden fence, you're allowed to cut down any part of the canopy that overhangs that vertical invisible line rising above the property boundary."
Daniel noted that householders are entitled to prune any branches on their side of the boundary, although the trimmings technically remain the property of the tree owner. "So anything that's on your side of the property, you can cut down," he said. "Legally, you're meant to throw the branches back onto his side or it's theft of his branches, but you can cut it down."
Nevertheless, he emphasised that property owners cannot venture onto a neighbour's land to remove the tree themselves, even if they consider it presents a risk. He said: "What you're not allowed to do is go into his garden and cut it down or remove the tree, or indeed compel him to do so, I'm afraid." When Anthony questioned whether this was still true "even if it's dangerous", Daniel responded: "Correct. The law's really unsatisfactory here. It lets you sue him after it's damaged your property. It doesn't allow you to compel him to cut the tree down."
