Unauthorized Trespass-Tree Damage

[eyeinstine]

So if I understand the advice of most recently, folks think in addition to my communications with the rental agency, I should get in contact with the land owner himself, who is the lawyer. (he doesn't live there, he contracts the rental of the property through a rental agency who then handles all the rental issues).

I wonder, so it doesn't appear I'm stepping the the folks at the rental agency, if I should let them know--that I want to talk to the owner. My guess is the lawyer doesn't even write the check directly for the work. IT's probably the rental agency, but that's another realm I know nothing about. I've never rented from an agency, only directly from the owner.

At any rate, this is probably about as "non-tree" oriented a conversation ever found on this web site!!!

Thanks again, J

J-sun,

i only have a little experience with property management companys, but it may be worth your while to let the land owner know whatis going on. He i sthe one who still pockets the majority of the monthly rent money. The management companys handle many properties, only taking a small percentage from each properties monthly rent. The total sum from all the properties adds up to the amount needed to make a business of it. So, i doubt the management company footed the bill for the tree removal. The landowner owns the property, and the tree's on it.. I'm most certain the repairs and maintenence of the whole property is handled by the property management company, but PAID by the property OWNER, or taken from his percentage of the monthly or yearly rents collected (depending upon how he receives his due income. monthly or yearly).

I'm not an expert, and i could very well be wrong in this situation!

Good Luck,
Ron

 

[Stumper]

J-sun, You already have a boatload of advice but I just want to concur with a bunch of it. Speak with the owner. Be polite but concerned. Everyone involved are victims of the no-good, incompetent tree guys. (It hurts to say that but it appears to be true). Take LOTS of pictures. Use a film camera. (Some courts are eager to reject digital images). Get the whole scene in the frame from several angles plus close-ups. If you get a helpful response from the other parties right away you may elect to forego paying for a report from a consulting arborist but If you have to pursue this it will be money well spent. I'm sorry about your rotten experience with the "tree care" industry.

 

[SpaceTaxi]

I'm not sure if this is helpful, but I think that the main question isn't so much the trespass as it is the damage to your tree.

You can ask a consulting arborist to give you an assessment of the value of your damaged tree. And/or you can get estimates on the costs of removing the tree, grinding the stump and replacing it. You can then approach the owner of the offending property and ask for monetary compensation. Whether or not you actually end up replacing the tree is up to you, however.

Thanks,

SpaceTaxi

 

[treeseer]

Last case I had like this: Davey crew hired to clear 100-yr. old (I counted the rings on the branch wound) pecan away from roof. They didn't want to make "improper cuts", so they took a huge leader back to the trunk instead of cutting to smaller laterals. Second problem: they entered client's yard to cut off that 100-yr old stem.

Client hired consultant, paid <$1000 for an appraisal that declared the tree a total loss and put a value of ~$9000 on loss. Davey's ins. co. paid the full amount after being reminded it could be worse--double damages possible in cases of trespass.

The advice here to get $ for removal and planting of small tree ignores the fact that owner lost large tree and is entitled to same. If someone wrecked my BMW I wouldn't accept a Hyundai; would you?

 

[tawilson]

Why not get an estimate done and submit it to the landowners/rental management companies liability insurance company and see what happens? You're not taking them to court and you might get satisfaction. If not, then you can pursue other means.

 

[Pondracer]

Hello to all,

I wanted to reply as I am a homeowner in Illinois who recently went through a similar situation which ended up being successfully resolved only after litigation. My situation involved a neighbor who trespassed and dropped multiple trees along the back of my lot, including 3 - 5 that were 35 years old. My wife is an attorney at one of the top litigation firms in the US, though she practices corporate law.

I realize this thread is old, so it may be a mute point now, but in my opinion you want to contact the landowner. You appear to be very reasonable and I would approach him in a non-adversarial way. Any smart attorney knows to avoid litigation if at all possible. And as a layperson I will tell you - avoid litigation if at all possible. Its costly and you NEVER know what will happen.

You will need to maintain perspective on the value of the tree. What is it really worth to you? That is difficult to determine sometimes, and it changes a bit too over time as the shock wears off.

If you do have to go toe-to-toe your best bet is to pursue an insurance company, either the owner's or the company that did the damage. Document everything, you will want pictures of the property from before the loss of the tree (if it has to come down).

Good luck. I'll never forget the feeling of walking into my backyard and seeing those stumps. Its a sick feeling, and you know in your heart you can't fix it.

 

[treeseer]

Excellent post, excellent advice.

 

[Molecule]

I smell classic shake-out potential happening here ...

I know I'll take it in the ear for this, but ... my cynical and polemical tendencies are not to be restrained on this one ... it comes from the reluctance of the owner to connect with J-sun, the damaged owner.

Consider this ... just suppose for a second that J-sun's property might be very valuable to a developer, let's call him Mister-X. He might want to develop it as commercial, or maybe as infill, or maybe as a daycare center, who knows,

and just suppose that the Mister-X is working with the adjoining rental property owner, or Mister-X is even the *actual owner (even if his deed is not recorded yet ... absent fraud, an unrecorded deed is a good deed) even though the tax records don't reflect the silent transfer yet (the tax collector doesn't care who pays the taxes)

and just suppose that the Mister-X wants to buy his neighbor's (J-sun's) property (in the industry it's called a "shake out.") As any litigator will tell you, it takes hard cash on hand, and plenty of it, to feed lawyers *and their support staff during a lawsuit.

Here is how Mister-X can force J-sun off his property. Basically Mister-X strangles J-sun financially, with lawyers. He trespasses and cuts down some trees. J-sun tries to contact the "perp" ... if only to ask why. The renters were ... conveniently ... "out of town." (Clue No 1) Exhasperated, and thinking he has the upper hand on "justice" even if his bank account is a little thin to feed laywers, J-sun talks to a lawyer.

BAMM! Mister-X just won. Even if all of J-sun's daughters are litigators, litigation will still cost researchers, private eyes, process servers, court recorders, filing fees, and on and on, potentially $100K in 6 months. Mister-X's attorneys, who are on payroll and do this for a living, start off by just "grinding" e.g. meeting with J-sun's attorneys for "shadow-boxing sessions" which basically accomplish nothing except to deplete J-sun's bank account. When they sense J-sun's financial exhasperation, at large legal bills which accomplish nothing, they then respond by "carpet bombing" J-sun with suits for defamation, intentional infliction, and yadda and yadda. Kick 'em when they're down.

Having already sucked all the hard ready cash out of J-sun's bank account, and they have no choice but to start dragging their feet on him ... "We need to pay the rent ... etc." So, J-sun becomes desparate and needs to sell something.

Along comes Mister nice guy, Mister-X and offers to drop all the lawsuits and purchase J-sun's property. The two pieces together might easily tripple or more the value of each, because with the assemblage the land mass, or acreage, reaches a kind of critical mass necessary for a phase change in zoning, density change, or allowable uses or ...

it all starts with some guy with a chainsaw dropping a tree and then disappearing ...

 

[NickfromWI]

At the company I work for (which is NOT a tree company) we deal with property management companies DAILY.

I recommend you first attempt to get what you want from the management company itself. In a sense, your issue is one you should take up with the landlord. The owner is not the landlord. He's a lawyer. He hired the prop mgrs because he doesn't want to deal with renters. That is why he pays the mgrs.

Dealing with the owner/lawyer should be a last resort. Sort of a, "Sorry to bother you, but I tried and tried the the prop mgrs just weren't getting the job done."

Now that puts him in a situation where he knows he's got to get to the bottom of this. If you go to him first, his response might (and should) be (whille patting you on the head and speaking in the voice of Foghorn Leghorn), "Lookie here, son. I pay this big ol' comp'ny all this money to deal with people like you so I don't have do. I'm a busy man, y'see. Why don't you call this nice lady and she'll get it all squared away for you. Now run along...."

Okay, sarcastic, I know. But just trying to show the point.

And FWIW, I think I'd not even bother trying to find the treeguys. Deal with the prop mgrs and the mgrs deal with the treeguys!

love
nick