News Feed

A father has been left with a staggering £85,000 debt after losing a lawsuit against his local council concerning a "dying" tree he claimed caused havoc in his garden. Bristol resident James Williams, aged 45, insisted that he had warned Bristol City Council about the danger posed by a 30ft ash tree bordering his property. Despite his repeated alerts over eighteen months, according to the father of four from Bristol, no action was taken to fell the problematic tree.

Tragically, the tree ultimately toppled over, wreaking destruction across his garden - obliterating a freshly finished swimming pool, trampoline, and a summer house along its path of ruin. The school caretaker feared the worst, expressing that fatalities could have occurred had his family been using the pool when the tree came down.

Williams found himself significantly out of pocket when his home insurance failed to cover the entirety of the damages, which amounted to £28,000; they only compensated him for £3,400. This prompted him to seek redress through the legal system. Nevertheless, the verdict dealt a further blow as the court exonerated the council from any liability. It judged that the decisions made by council workers regarding the tree were “competent” and “appropriate.” Now, Williams is faced with a double loss: an initial quote for garden repairs amounting to £8,000 and legal fees owed to the council totalling a hefty £77,000.

Reflecting on the terrifying incident, he recounted: "We could have been killed by it if we were outside - I still have nightmares about it." Back in May 2019, following his wife Leanne's, aged 43, report that large branches were falling from the tree into their plot, a representative from Bristol City Council was said to have assessed the situation at their home. "They came out, looked at it, and promised to cut the tree down," Williams asserted.

A month on, Leanne lodged a fresh complaint upon learning that the tree might be afflicted with ash dieback disease and was "dead." In June, when the council's arborist paid another visit, they observed 'die present in the upper and middle canopy'. Despite this, they found 'no other signs of significant disease' nor an 'imminent risk of failure to the stem of the tree'.

The expert recommended that come September, the tree should be "monolithed." This would entail stripping away all branches and cutting down the trunk to no more than four metres in height. However, despite these reassurances, the tree remained standing - neither felled nor monolithed - much to the consternation of the Williams family.

Then, on October 3, 2020, disaster struck as the tree came crashing down. "We were literally going to fill the pool that morning to use with our children - I still have nightmares about the fact that if it had held on for another 12 hours, it may have killed us all as we would have been in the swimming pool," he revealed. Leanne, a stay-at-home mum, likened the aftermath to a film scene, saying: "It was like a scene from The Wizard of Oz."

She detailed the wreckage, noting that "The pool and trampoline had been completely crushed and there was smashed glass and wood everywhere from the summer house." After the incident, Bristol City Council dispatched a team to clear the debris and acknowledged their responsibility for the situation, according to James.

In a shocking turn of events, James recounted how, mere hours after the incident, the council member who had previously assessed the tree arrived and dismissed the council's liability, blaming the collapse on a storm. This left James "furious" as his garden was "basically ruined." Following the debacle, James took legal action, filing a civil claim at Bristol County Court against the council, which proceeded to trial in February this year.

James and his wife Leanne argued that the tree officer's initial assessment was 'negligent' for failing to recommend immediate further investigation. However, the judge remained unconvinced that the council's tree officer had overlooked anything during their visual inspection, as stated in the court's judgement.

The judgement also noted that the decisions made by the officer fell within 'a range of reasonable decisions' that a competent group of tree officers would consider suitable. Ultimately, the case was thrown out, with the council cleared of any wrongdoing.

The entire situation has been a source of immense stress for James' family, including his wife Leanne, her two daughters from a previous relationship, Sienna, 15, Scarlett, 12, and their children together, Emmi, four, and one year old Maya, all living under the same roof. The timing of the tree's fall could not have been worse for Leanne, who had just given birth days prior, amidst the height of lockdown restrictions.

James lamented the unfortunate timing, expressing how vital the garden was during that period: "It was the worst possible timing to not have a garden," he said. He added, reflecting on the day of the incident: "We were going to fill the pool that day - I got up early in the morning, and when I looked out, it was a shock."

A family has been living a nightmare after a tree crashed into their daughters' bedroom wall. Four years on from the incident, James revealed: "The garden is still dishevelled and we've started clearing away the brambles and debris." He added with frustration, "But considering we now have to do this all on our own, it's going to take even more time." Bristol City Council has refused to provide any comments on the matter.


Source link

Leave A Comment


Last Visited Articles


Info Board

Visitor Counter
0
 

Todays visit

42 Articles 6750 RSS ARTS 13 Photos

Popular News

🚀 Welcome to our website! Stay updated with the latest news. 🎉

United States

3.15.7.155 :: Total visit:


Welcome 3.35.7.355 Click here to Register or login
Oslo time:2025-04-27 Whos is online (last 10 min): 
1 - United States - 40.474.407.434
2 - United States - 3.75.7.755
3 - United States - 20.171.207.61
4 - United States - 66.299.79.973
5 - Singapore - 45.528.54.535
6 - United States - 77.249.70.774
7 - Singapore - 67.628.665.656
8 - Singapore - 47.528.54.535
9 - United States - 3.434.84.74
10 - United States - 98.82.38.424
11 - United States - 3.55.7.50
12 - United States - 54.84.242.29
13 - United States - 54.225.93.343
14 - United States - 54.87.95.7
15 - Singapore - 47.020.009.202
16 - Singapore - 43.338.33.369
17 - Singapore - 27.228.20.27
18 - Germany - 662.62.263.667
19 - United States - 77.776.77.77
20 - Singapore - 49.928.923.65
21 - Singapore - 48.828.88.288
22 - Singapore - 47.028.98.204
23 - United States - 43.59.233.24
24 - Singapore - 47.228.54.205


Farsi English Norsk RSS