Case in point - just last week a lady asked me to prune the neighbor's tree branches off of her side of the yard as they were getting close to the house (but not yet touching). I responded, "I understand you're entitled by law to prune the tree but that would meen leaving stubs on the neighbor's side of the fence (no other laterals to prune back to so have to go to the main stem)."
She responded, "I dont' care about their side. They don't care about my side so why should I care about their side?"
I could sense that there was tension so I explained that I have to consider how all parties will react to the work I do - not just the client. If the neighbor would be unhappy with the work I perform on his tree, I think that is important enough to require his consent regardless of what the law says. If I PO him and he goes and tells all his friends that I wrecked his tree without his permisssion, that will cost me money and damage my reputation. Whereas, if the client asking me to prune her neighbor's tree is unhappy with me for passing on the work because I feel it is unethical to perform the work without the tree owner's consent, then at least the worst she can say about me is that I was trying to not offend her neighbor.
Losing work and a potential client is not ideal but it's a better result than being smeared as "the hack that butchered my tree without my permission". Call it safe - perhaps it is but it's also business and I'm a businessman. I'm not afraid to tell my clients that I can't afford to get wrapped up in a lawsuit over a $300 pruning job. Most of them understand - some don't. Oh well...
AP
It's safe, but that's not a negative thing. I agree with your approach in many situations, especially in such a case that you've nothing to prune back to but the main where the main is clearly in the neighbor’s yard. I know from clearance work, you can't keep everyone happy, but that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t try. Thankfully that's a finished chapter for the most part, however some of the same principles with regards to tree conflicts transfer. I'll do my best to communicate and resolve issues, I maintain a high success rate, I can usually talk someone into it being their idea, but every so often you have someone that's impossible. It's a judgment call, but more often than not the problem child's a tard that nobody is going to listening to, and the ones that will I could care less about. (Birds of a feather….) If my competition gets flooded with them I consider that a manifold blessing. I'll win the ones I want, and let their good news travel.
I guess when it comes down to it, I'm not afraid to tork someone off if their tree is causing others damage or is partially high risk and they are being unreasonable. Often times the tree(s) in question are simply neglected anyway. (I po folks with reasonable bids all the time…can’t win em all.
)
For example, this summer I had a silver maple that was reaching over and rubbing the peak of my clients roof when leafed out. The same tree is causing some damage to the tree owner's roof. My landlord knows them and asked if they would like us to prune it back. The answer was no. So we proceeded with the work to alleviate the situation. The tree owner came home and got into it with my landlord, by the time I was coming down, he stormed off. Later he apologized, that was nice, but I could care less either way. I'm not interested in balking on a substantial segment of available work from reasonable people for the ignorance of a few bad eggs.
Now then, on the other hand, if I find myself in the crossfire of a peeing contest of substantial or otherwise influential individuals with plenty of means to their own ends, I’ll gladly wait it out, especially if it’s a trivial matter where a perfectly sound tree is making a “mess” and the potential client wants me to wall it with the property line. In that case, I’m not afraid to tork them off either. Maybe that’s a case where the tard has called me first.
It’s really a case by case issue, and your posts have given me some ideas for future conflicts, thank you, I’m just exploring the other side of the coin. I’m just saying that I tend to consider the law to be an equal parameter to anyone’s feelings. In other words, it may be the neighbor’s tree, but it doesn’t give him the right to be a thorn in his neighbor’s side with a fixed menace of aerial assault. Often times their feelings are based on ignorance and shouldn’t always be the highest calling for consideration. I’ll address it with the best interest of the tree and client’s property in mind and let the chips fall where they may.
I’ll take a reputation of being reasonable, yet willing to deal with the hard cases as I see fit, even if it means someone gets upset. Sue me..lol.
