Residents cut down a wood on Bristol railway line without permission to improve their views

[Mojo]

What's interesting from the photo is that there's a second fence between where the trees were and the railway line

I don't know why there's a second fence but it seems everything between the track and the second fence is untouched.

There is no second fence. The photo you provided links to a picture taken from the top of the cutting on the other side from the houses. If you look at the video or photos on the Bristol Evening Post website (no idea why they have put it as a video when more still photographs would have sufficed) you can see that the trees cut down were immediately over the fence on the cutting, right next to the railway line.

See attached Screenshot from the video which shows the situation. This bit of the video was taken from the platform at Montpelier station. Also see https://i2-prod.bristolpost.co.uk/i...e/ALTERNATES/s615b/BRJB20180126A-005-1JPG.jpg for a photo taken from the same location.

 

[B&I]

Can you be more precise than just stating "a few quid" that I have emboldened in the extract from your posting shown above....How much would this "few quid" be in reality in the area in question.

I don't know. I'm a lawyer, not an estate agent. What you're asking is like asking a psychiatrist to do impressions.

 

[mushroomchow]

If NR actually maintained their embankments to anything like the standard we had up until the Beeching Plan, things like this simply wouldn't happen. The structural integrity thing is a moot point too - if embankments were clear it would surely be easier to identify structural weaknesses than having them buried under a blanket of hawthorn and bramble and hoping that the roots keep the soil in place.

Some parts of the country are better than others, granted, but the failure to deal with lineside vegetation is one of the great shames of our system.

 

[edwin_m]

If they'd asked NR to remove the trees on the grounds that they had grown too large and blocked their view (or caused them some other problem) then would NR have done the job without charging them?

 

[YorkshireBear]

If they'd asked NR to remove the trees on the grounds that they had grown too large and blocked their view (or caused them some other problem) then would NR have done the job without charging them?

No they would most certainly not.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I don't know. I'm a lawyer, not an estate agent. What you're asking is like asking a psychiatrist to do impressions.

Yet all that being said, you did have the confidence to use the term "a few quid" in your posting, so as a lawyer, you must be aware of the smallness of the financial implications of what you actually said in print.

 

[Marklund]

chortle, chortle, chorlte - what jolly japes.

Not far off the mark though.

 

[mpthomson]

You’ll probably find the “tree surgeons” responsible are, ahem, mobile. Very difficult to trace.

Unlikely, he's named and quoted in the press articles about this and is claiming they DID have NR permission for this. Whether that's true or not we'll find out.

 

[pemma]

If they'd asked NR to remove the trees on the grounds that they had grown too large and blocked their view (or caused them some other problem) then would NR have done the job without charging them?

If you read the full article it states one of the residents (who says he's a landscape gardener) opened a channel of communication with Network Rail via email regarding the trees. He's refused to share the emails with the local newspaper but Network Rail said none of them gave him permission to cut down the trees.

 

[notverydeep]

Great. Wonderful. Superb. Oh the embankment has collapsed..........................

They could be their own worst enemy here, not only might tree removal compromise the stability of the embankment and make them liable for railway disruption, looking at the picture, it could also lead to subsidence that could damage their own houses and hence reduce their value!

 

[Tetchytyke]

Unlikely, he's named and quoted in the press articles about this and is claiming they DID have NR permission for this. Whether that's true or not we'll find out.

Nah, Mr Cutting (loving the nominative determinism) was the neighbour who hired the "tree surgeons".

It's the fact they've left the logs there, resting on the embankment, that's the biggest immediate worry. What a set of morons.

 

[talltim]

Yet all that being said, you did have the confidence to use the term "a few quid" in your posting, so as a lawyer, you must be aware of the smallness of the financial implications of what you actually said in print.

'A few quid' is often used as a euphemism for 'a lot of money'.

 

[InOban]

Of course it's illegal, but I suspect first, that remaining substantial piece of timber will shortly end up in someone's wood pile drying out for next winter, and second that the substantial stumps left will sprout new growth in the next couple of months; they have essentially coppiced the trees. (Unless, of course, the 'tree surgeons' have treated the stumps to kill them.)
The embankment, which seems less steep than some, could be equally stabilised by lower growing shrubs like gorse bramble or even hazel.

Since sooner or later one of these trees will blow over, I think that they have saved NR money.

BTW, not being familiar with Bristol, what line is this, and how much traffic does it carry?

 

[GB]

I think that they have saved NR money.

Which is far far from the point.

 

[Marklund]

Which is far far from the point.

Exactly!

 

[AlterEgo]

Unlikely, he's named and quoted in the press articles about this and is claiming they DID have NR permission for this. Whether that's true or not we'll find out.

The tree surgeon is not named.

One of the residents who organised it is named - Jonty Cutting (would be a brilliant name for a tree surgeon btw!) - and says he did have permission via email but no, he has not forwarded that email to the paper.

 

[pdeaves]

On a technicality (doesn't affect the intention of the discussion) the affected area is a cutting, not an embankment (the former you cut into the ground to make a trench below natural ground level, the latter you bank up the earth to raise it above natural ground level)

 

[bspahh]

There is an aerial photograph at Bing Maps showing the original trees https://binged.it/2EjhP6P

 

[Dr_Intoxicated]

Looks much nicer with the trees in place, major act of vandalism.

 

[SwindonBert]

Of course it's illegal, but I suspect first, that remaining substantial piece of timber will shortly end up in someone's wood pile drying out for next winter, and second that the substantial stumps left will sprout new growth in the next couple of months; they have essentially coppiced the trees. (Unless, of course, the 'tree surgeons' have treated the stumps to kill them.)
The embankment, which seems less steep than some, could be equally stabilised by lower growing shrubs like gorse bramble or even hazel.

Since sooner or later one of these trees will blow over, I think that they have saved NR money.

BTW, not being familiar with Bristol, what line is this, and how much traffic does it carry?

It's on The Severn Beach line

 

[lammergeier]

Unlikely, he's named and quoted in the press articles about this and is claiming they DID have NR permission for this. Whether that's true or not we'll find out.

There is simply no way that NR would authorise non-approved contractors to do substandard work like this without risk assessments or the usual safety precautions in place. It is simply so unlikely it warrants little further discussion.

This pillock Jonty Cutting who arranged the work deserves everything that's hopefully coming to him including clear up costs, damage to his reputation in the community and with a little bit of luck, prosecution. I doubt any trees were subject to TPO's, however we can but hope. Furthermore, it is illegal to disturb a bat colony so if the talk of bats being present is true then there may well be an avenue for prosecution there, if not for Cutting then the morons who carried out the work who give other tree surgeons a bad name.

 

[Domh245]

On a technicality (doesn't affect the intention of the discussion) the affected area is a cutting, not an embankment (the former you cut into the ground to make a trench below natural ground level, the latter you bank up the earth to raise it above natural ground level)

It makes the name of the chap involved even more topical!

 

[nlogax]

What's interesting from the photo is that there's a second fence between where the trees were and the railway line

Looks like that job was carried out by the tree surgeon equivalent of Jack the Ripper.

 

[ArchieWoodbine]

Interesting thought, but I imagine Jonty 'Railway' Cutting (how he'll be forever known down the pub I'd imagine) would have had to provide assurance to the tree-surgeons that they did indeed have permission to work on that land. If (or more likely 'when') it transpires they were trespassing and vandalising private property on his instruction, I bet Jonty will be getting a firm word from their soliciters too!

 

[SWTCommuter]

This pillock Jonty Cutting who arranged the work deserves everything that's hopefully coming to him including clear up costs, damage to his reputation in the community and with a little bit of luck, prosecution...

If this similar case in Poole is anything to go by, it could turn out to be very expensive for him

Borough of Poole successfully prosecuted Neil Davey, a local auctioneer, of felling a mature 40ft maritime pine situated in his neighbour's property, at Bournemouth Crown Court on 23 November 2012. Neil Davey lost his subsequent appeal in the Court of Appeal in London on 11 June 2013.
He was appealing against a confiscation order of £50,000, a fine of £75,000 plus a £15 victim surcharge, £100 compensation to his neighbour and council costs of £14,500.
Andy Dearing, Team Manager Planning Enforcement, Borough of Poole, said: "... The fine, financial penalty and costs are a clear message to anyone contemplating such an act that the overall cost and reputational damage outweigh any gain, whether it is for a view or a planning advantage."

http://www.poole.gov.uk/newsroom/20...2013/court-of-appeal-upholds-tree-conviction/

According to the Bournemouth Echo, the tree surgeon was also fined £5,500
http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/10068984.Axed_tree_costs_man_record___125_000/

 

[bspahh]

The neighbour who arrange for the trees (Jonty Cutting) is an artist. This profile
http://www.northbristolartists.org.uk/members-2/jontycutting/ says:

My paintings are inspired by subjects around me; still life taken from objects in the house and garden plus some landscapes. My painting style is a mix of realism and impressionist.

 

[lammergeier]

If this similar case in Poole is anything to go by, it could turn out to be very expensive for him

http://www.poole.gov.uk/newsroom/20...2013/court-of-appeal-upholds-tree-conviction/

According to the Bournemouth Echo, the tree surgeon was also fined £5,500
http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/10068984.Axed_tree_costs_man_record___125_000/

A good result, although I expect the fines were high due to the TPO which I suspect won't apply here and the offenders presumably high income living where he did.

http://www.northbristolartists.org.uk/members-2/jontycutting/ says:

Pretentious as well as selfish I see.

 

[backontrack]

It's ironic that his name's Jonty 'Cutting'.

 

[rebmcr]

Exclusive footage of Jonty Cutting!

It's a joke, of course!

 

[goblinuser]

http://www.northbristolartists.org.uk/members-2/jontycutting/ says:

Sorry but how is a profile on an obscure watercolour painting forum relevant to this in any way at all?