owning trees

[dbeck]

I know there has been threads about removing for money, removing when removing shouldn't be done and preservation over removing.
Recently, at WAA summer conference, Dr. Ball brought up facts about liabilities if your company prunes a tree and it later fails. In a court of law, he has seen cases go back 5 yrs. That means 5 yrs ago you prune a tree and 5 yrs later it fails. If a court can prove you, as a professional, should have seen the defect, your company is now liable. THAT means, every job you do, you own the trees associated w/ that job. Something fails...you pay.
Any thoughts?

(sorry if this has already been brought up!)

 

[NeTree]

Yeah... the liberal dickwad lawers who think this kind of crap up need to get a f*cking hobby.

 

[xander9727]

A hobby.......like russian roulette!

 

[NeTree]

...with an automatic.

 

[Nickrosis]

It's just something to always keep in mind. Today, someone called about a tree that was shedding bark. I stopped out and told him that it's natural for his beautiful sycamore to do that. But it did have a cavity at the base of it, and I mentioned to him that I saw it, but that it's not a concern of mine because the rest of the tree appeared to be structurally sound.

Should that tree fall over, he could go after me even though I didn't get paid to tell him that his tree was fine. I'm a certified arborist and should tell people if a tree is about to fall on their house. So you go with your best judgement. And don't screw up! When in doubt, cover your butt and at least get something in writing that the person should have a Resist-o-graph performed or something.

 

[fmueller]

So does arbortist insurance or small biz insurance cover that kind of crap? If so I wonder if they drop you like a bad habit when they get a claim?

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

They need to go after the bulldozers that compress the soil biomass during construction etc.; also changing soil level on trunk, roots and drainage. Singlely, or in woods, trees will try to protect this zone, but not with strategies that are a match for steel cutting, power and weight.

2 trees 1000' apart in an open field that are alike (whispered genetics being the final constraint); will have the same inputs of light and air qualities. The final input of soil attributes being the operative variable. Also, without other tree tops etc. to lean on; the single connection point to ground must be healthy to support the largest life ever, in size and weight, that also, sits off balanced, and gets tossed around by wind; torquing on this single connection.

Some trees that supported or broke up wind loading might have been removed too....

That sod man, scraping mulch while selling soil and sod up to tree's knees, needs to go to.......

 

[BlackSmith]

Oh yeah, it's "lawyer" not "lawer".

 

[SilverBlue]

"Any thoughts?"

Yeah, only in America can you see such stupid lawsuits. Time to start charging for some estimates and have every tree owner sign a liability release for estimates just to build up a trust fund.

 

[jkrueger]

I look at this as managable and maybe profitable for the arborist.

Have a form for the client to sign off, a disclaimer of future problems. Unless they sign for you to be notified if any thing appears not OK and for you to be on sight every year as a maintence program. And if they at any time choose not to use you, you will be releasd form all liability. Something like that. Even the maintenance program could have a disclaimer clause in the contract.

Jack

 

[NeTree]

Originally posted by SilverBlue
"Any thoughts?"

Yeah, only in America can you see such stupid lawsuits. Time to start charging for some estimates and have every tree owner sign a liability release for estimates just to build up a trust fund.

We've had this discussion before; there's a difference between an estimate (free), and a consultation (not free)...

with good reason.

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Jack's on the right track; arborists who move into PHC monitoring and regular visits can stay on top of defects and manage risk responsibly.

I don't know what case Ball's referring to and I share rocky's suspicion that it has been overhyped. Maybe Ball's point was to be observant.spyder's point about aggravating factors by mismanagement by builders and landscapers is a good one; they too advertise as professionals who can be held responsible for neglect AND abuse.

In any case there is no reason to get paranoid and start recommending removal of every tree with a defect, unless you want to live in a desert. A clause at the end of your estimate/invoice forms stating that you have NOT been paid to do a risk assessment should help CYA. This is the one I use for appraisals:

PREMISES: _________________________________________
I, Guy Meilleur, CERTIFY to the best of my knowledge and belief:
1. That the statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct.
2. That the analysis, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and that they are personal, unbiased professional analysis, opinions, and conclusions.
3. That I have no present or prospective interest in the plant(s) that is the subject of this report, and that I have no personal interest or bias with respect the parties involved.
4. That my compensation is not contingent upon a predetermined evaluation that favors the cause of a client, the amount of the value estimate, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event.
5. That my analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this appraisal has been prepared, in conformity with current scientific research, long experience and a full understanding of industry standards.
6. That method(s) found in this report are based on a request to determine the condition of the plant(s) considering reasonable factors of plant evaluation.
7. That my report is based on the information known to me at this time. If more information is disclosed, I may have further opinions.

 

[Nickrosis]

I think it's reasonable to some extent. If a mechanic did a free brake inspection and said they were fine (like that would ever happen...) and I killed three people leaving the shop because I couldn't stop - I would want to be able to go after the mechanic.

In the same way, if I look at a tree that has visible signs that indicate imminent danger, I should very well tell someone that instead of suggesting we prune it or use a growth regulator or some other profit venue. An issue with trees, though, is the fact that it isn't all laid out in front of you. We can't "see" inside trees for defects. So we do the best we can and hope that the judge and jury have their brains flicked on for our day in court.

 

[jkrueger]

Wish I had all the expesive equipment to do 'real' tree integrity assesment, i.e., truck and roots.

Have not found a place around here to rent it from. That is a way to be more confident in an evaluation.

Do any of you guys have any tech. equipment to do that in your possesion?

Jack

 

[Guy Meilleur]

Originally posted by jkrueger
Wish I had all the expesive equipment..to be more confident in an evaluation.

Do any of you guys have any tech. equipment to do that in your possesion?

Eyes, aided by microscopes and binoculars.

Ears, to hear the owners' accounts of the tree's history, aided by rubber mallet, to sound for hollows and dead bark.

Hands, aided by hand tools, to excavate root collars and hollows.

Nose, to detect biotic and abiotic bacteria, etc.

A $35. soil probe is the most expensive diagnostic tool I regularly use, so Expensive, Schmexpensive.

But Experience, supported by learning from publications like
http://www.na.fs.fed.us/spfo/pubs/uf/utrmm/
and from colleagues like Dan Marion at ISA in Pittsburgh (missed ya there, Jack)?

Priceless!

 

[Treeman14]

Originally posted by jkrueger
Do any of you guys have any tech. equipment to do that in your possesion?

Jack

I bring this with me on every consultation. I highly recommend everyone else do the same.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

Which side is the speech side of brain???


i lost that link that Guy just gave for almost a year; and knew it was a loss too! Bugged Tom for it a number of times; i first got it from him.

It seems even though he was a contributor to the work; he's done so much, he couldn't remember which link i was talking about.......

 

[arboromega]

excellent link guy. i was online this last week for two hours looking for info like that from the feds. thanks for the knowledge

 

[jkrueger]

OK, Guy and et'al, I got the point and I'm speaking from an observed aspect of this thread.

I may tell a possible client that they may have 3-4 years left in a tree. Hammer and other experiences of such may be all I need. And if the tree falls down on his house will he take it to court?

Was looking for sound reasoning germain to this thread.

Had a tree to look at this week end that was very big, did I say very big, well a 100' + and the potential client wanted me to do a quick evaluation. the trunk was showing rot just above the root flair and the girth of the trunk at that point was OK to hold the weight so far. It had been a double leader tree with the lost leader at the bottom.

I will give my usual response to the clients question about the tree and in lew of this thread with possible litigious results I'm haveing to rethink my usual approach.

I think that clients that show up like the one brought to the for ground by this thread are rare. I'm reacting to it anyway.

Jack

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

i tell a lot of people that anything standing is a risk, just a question of how much.

If you are R.Handed, L.Side brain controls that hand and speach. So damage to R.Side of brain should allow speach; unless; you were borne L.Handed and forced R.Handed. Then you are 'R.Handed' to society, but still L.Handed in brain; so R.Side damage impedes speach. After even 70 years, which hand ya hold the TP will discern to doctor, your properly inborne 'setting'; in trying to sort loss of body functions to parts of brain injury and why.