Bang the neighbor's wife.
CNN is an enemy of the state and should be treated as such.
BenFiasco14 said:
Bang the neighbor's wife.
Thank you, I've definitely advised them of that.cledus6150 said:
Seeing your handle id assume you would recognize that tree as a potential widow maker as well, the longer that tree stands the less likely you will find a skilled and insured company to come and remove it. Be thankful that it is surrounded by other trees or so it appears that lend support and shelter from wind for the time being. From an arborist's stand point you can only advise them of the hazards and potential liability associated with that tree.
All good advice, I'm going to resend another certified letter and probably mail a regular copy as well since they're too lazy to go to the post office and pick up the certified copy.daniel00 said:
At minimum, I recommend you try again with the certified letter or something similar. A friend had a neighbor's tree fall on their cars when they were in a rental house, and they were only saved from having to pay for repairs themselves because the homeowner had previously sent the neighbor a certified letter about their tree. So getting some kind of formal documentation that they knew of the situation and its risks would be helpful to you in the future if the tree does fall and damage anything. It would not hurt to try to personally send something to their insurance company if you could figure that out. It might not help either, but it wouldn't hurt. As I understand it, homeowners are only responsible for where their tree falls if they knew the tree was unhealthy/dead. So it would help your case to be able to prove they knew about the tree and the risks.
I would second the recommendation to offer to help pay to cut the tree down. I'm not saying this is reasonable or fair in the general sense. But it does not seem like you have any legal options to force them to do what is right, nor do you know their financial situation and whether they can afford to pay. You might ask if you can meet with them, lay out all your concerns, and tell them if finances are an issue, you are willing to help pay. It's not the ideal situation for your pocketbook, but it might be the best option for the safety of your family.
The tree is east of my house, but we had 100mph winds here earlier this year. They blew to the east and to my surprise blew the fence down and broke a lot of tree limbs in my yard, but not the dead tree.SteveBott said:
You can notify them and make a claim on their homeowners insurance IF they have any. You be surprised at how many people do not carry insurance if the home is paid off. Odds increase if they are bums.
Question. Is the tree north or south of your home? The reason I ask is there is a good chance it breaks off in a windstorm. Most of these storm or from the north and in the spring. Odds go way up or down depending on your answer.
That's why I kept the original certified letter I sent them unopened and all of the receipts.SteveBott said:
Doesn't matter if they pick it up they are legally notified. But at least they read the regular letter
I'm not sure there's a path to it. Definitely not from my yard, it's way too tight. Even if I took my fence down there wouldn't be enough turning radius. Their yard is huge, but there's a pool, outdoor kitchen and pool house between the front and back.Tony Franklins Other Shoe said:
A buddy of mine did tree work when we were in college, he was from Longview. I helped him out a lot to earn extra money and work off hangovers. Even back in our stupid days, no way he would have climbed that one to take it down the usual way. That one is bucket truck material for sure.
I really like this idea. Offer to pay to cut it down, but don't mention hauling it out and see if they catch it. That might be the one scenario where paying for it myself would feel right.TwoMarksHand said:
Why don't you just cut it down (with their permission of course) and then walk away. Make them deal with actually getting rid of the tree.
That is a big concern of mine. "oh, he'll fix it or pay for it"Cibalo said:
the only problem with paying for it is then your neighbors will keep finding things of theirs for you to pay for. it is a slippery slope and I would prefer to not go down.
my hunting lease is on a pine tree farm so we get them falling down all the time. however by the time they get to that point they don't do a lot of damage when they fall
I'd throw it in on any lawsuit, especially if somebody has been notified of a danger previously and is willfully ignoring it.CHOCOLATE CHIP TRIP said:schmellba99 said:
Seems strange your lawyer woulnd't send them a letter explaining that they have been notified several times of the potential hazard of the tree and should it fall and damage your property, a lawsuit will be forthcoming to recover all expenses for damages plus lawyer's fees and also gently reminding them of the consequences of what might happen legally if there is an injury to a person or pet as a result of negligence on their part.
What would be your basis for claiming attorneys' fees?
schmellba99 said:I'd throw it in on any lawsuit, especially if somebody has been notified of a danger previously and is willfully ignoring it.CHOCOLATE CHIP TRIP said:schmellba99 said:
Seems strange your lawyer woulnd't send them a letter explaining that they have been notified several times of the potential hazard of the tree and should it fall and damage your property, a lawsuit will be forthcoming to recover all expenses for damages plus lawyer's fees and also gently reminding them of the consequences of what might happen legally if there is an injury to a person or pet as a result of negligence on their part.
What would be your basis for claiming attorneys' fees?
If it gets tossed, it gets tossed. But seems that including fees for damages incurred is a standard procedure, especially if you incur any monetary losses that require a lawyer to settle up - otherwise you aren't made whole, which is the entire point of insurance/lawsuits to begin with.
expresswrittenconsent said:
I strenuously object.
Not being a lawyer, I don't know every damned code. Didn't realize this was going to turn into the standard "let's split hairs over something really kind of trivial" thread, but this is the OB and I should have known better.CHOCOLATE CHIP TRIP said:schmellba99 said:I'd throw it in on any lawsuit, especially if somebody has been notified of a danger previously and is willfully ignoring it.CHOCOLATE CHIP TRIP said:schmellba99 said:
Seems strange your lawyer woulnd't send them a letter explaining that they have been notified several times of the potential hazard of the tree and should it fall and damage your property, a lawsuit will be forthcoming to recover all expenses for damages plus lawyer's fees and also gently reminding them of the consequences of what might happen legally if there is an injury to a person or pet as a result of negligence on their part.
What would be your basis for claiming attorneys' fees?
If it gets tossed, it gets tossed. But seems that including fees for damages incurred is a standard procedure, especially if you incur any monetary losses that require a lawyer to settle up - otherwise you aren't made whole, which is the entire point of insurance/lawsuits to begin with.
I'm just asking what your basis would be. Is it something in Chapter 38 of the TCPRC, or something else?
Or are you saying you'd sign and file a pleading with the court that you know is partially frivolous?
Everyone not named "schmellba99" saw the setup a mile away.CHOCOLATE CHIP TRIP said:schmellba99 said:Not being a lawyer, I don't know every damned code. Didn't realize this was going to turn into the standard "let's split hairs over something really kind of trivial" thread, but this is the OB and I should have known better.CHOCOLATE CHIP TRIP said:schmellba99 said:I'd throw it in on any lawsuit, especially if somebody has been notified of a danger previously and is willfully ignoring it.CHOCOLATE CHIP TRIP said:schmellba99 said:
Seems strange your lawyer woulnd't send them a letter explaining that they have been notified several times of the potential hazard of the tree and should it fall and damage your property, a lawsuit will be forthcoming to recover all expenses for damages plus lawyer's fees and also gently reminding them of the consequences of what might happen legally if there is an injury to a person or pet as a result of negligence on their part.
What would be your basis for claiming attorneys' fees?
If it gets tossed, it gets tossed. But seems that including fees for damages incurred is a standard procedure, especially if you incur any monetary losses that require a lawyer to settle up - otherwise you aren't made whole, which is the entire point of insurance/lawsuits to begin with.
I'm just asking what your basis would be. Is it something in Chapter 38 of the TCPRC, or something else?
Or are you saying you'd sign and file a pleading with the court that you know is partially frivolous?
If I'm damaged due to the actions of somebody else and it requires me to spend money - whether through a lawyer or other means - to recover my damages, I consider those expenses as part of my damages and will definitely include those costs in the invoice because not doing so means I'm not made whole. And I wouldn't consider such costs as frivolous.
I also know that if you don't ask for something, you'll never get it. Contract negotiation 101 stuff there, which I do on occasion through my career.
But hey, I'm sure you'll find some obscure thing to pick on in that statement as well. Have at it brosephus, go get your jollies off.
Oh, you're not a lawyer. Then I would recommend you not advise the OP on legal matters you know nothing about, like whether or not his attorneys' fees would be recoverable in litigation.
"Valuable" is subjective.Sasappis said:
While he is not a lawyer, he is a valuable and longterm contributor to this forum. You are not. Sometimes it is best to just comment that fees likely would not be recoverable here and just move on.
Hahaha. Agreed Schmellba may be an *******, but he at least delivers (sometimes) valuable information while being an *******.trouble said:
You really have to try to look like more of an ass than schmellba but by God, you nailed it.
Assuming you are a lawyer - in which case, like most lawyers I deal with, your reading comprehension pretty much sucks balls. You should work on that before getting on your high horse on a fuggin message board.CHOCOLATE CHIP TRIP said:schmellba99 said:Not being a lawyer, I don't know every damned code. Didn't realize this was going to turn into the standard "let's split hairs over something really kind of trivial" thread, but this is the OB and I should have known better.CHOCOLATE CHIP TRIP said:schmellba99 said:I'd throw it in on any lawsuit, especially if somebody has been notified of a danger previously and is willfully ignoring it.CHOCOLATE CHIP TRIP said:schmellba99 said:
Seems strange your lawyer woulnd't send them a letter explaining that they have been notified several times of the potential hazard of the tree and should it fall and damage your property, a lawsuit will be forthcoming to recover all expenses for damages plus lawyer's fees and also gently reminding them of the consequences of what might happen legally if there is an injury to a person or pet as a result of negligence on their part.
What would be your basis for claiming attorneys' fees?
If it gets tossed, it gets tossed. But seems that including fees for damages incurred is a standard procedure, especially if you incur any monetary losses that require a lawyer to settle up - otherwise you aren't made whole, which is the entire point of insurance/lawsuits to begin with.
I'm just asking what your basis would be. Is it something in Chapter 38 of the TCPRC, or something else?
Or are you saying you'd sign and file a pleading with the court that you know is partially frivolous?
If I'm damaged due to the actions of somebody else and it requires me to spend money - whether through a lawyer or other means - to recover my damages, I consider those expenses as part of my damages and will definitely include those costs in the invoice because not doing so means I'm not made whole. And I wouldn't consider such costs as frivolous.
I also know that if you don't ask for something, you'll never get it. Contract negotiation 101 stuff there, which I do on occasion through my career.
But hey, I'm sure you'll find some obscure thing to pick on in that statement as well. Have at it brosephus, go get your jollies off.
Oh, you're not a lawyer. Then I would recommend you not advise the OP on legal matters you know nothing about, like whether or not his attorneys' fees would be recoverable in litigation.
I am an *******, make no bones about it. Don't have time for beating around the bush and given who I deal with on a daily basis - it's required.SweaterVest said:Hahaha. Agreed Schmellba may be an *******, but he at least delivers (sometimes) valuable information while being an *******.trouble said:
You really have to try to look like more of an ass than schmellba but by God, you nailed it.
Quote:
Oh, you're not a lawyer. Then I would recommend you not advise the OP on legal matters you know nothing about, like whether or not his attorneys' fees would be recoverable in litigation.
I really don't argue over obscure minutia, at least I don't think I do. But hell, maybe I do and just don't view it that way. Meh.Yelnick McWawa said:Everyone not named "schmellba99" saw the setup a mile away.CHOCOLATE CHIP TRIP said:schmellba99 said:Not being a lawyer, I don't know every damned code. Didn't realize this was going to turn into the standard "let's split hairs over something really kind of trivial" thread, but this is the OB and I should have known better.CHOCOLATE CHIP TRIP said:schmellba99 said:I'd throw it in on any lawsuit, especially if somebody has been notified of a danger previously and is willfully ignoring it.CHOCOLATE CHIP TRIP said:schmellba99 said:
Seems strange your lawyer woulnd't send them a letter explaining that they have been notified several times of the potential hazard of the tree and should it fall and damage your property, a lawsuit will be forthcoming to recover all expenses for damages plus lawyer's fees and also gently reminding them of the consequences of what might happen legally if there is an injury to a person or pet as a result of negligence on their part.
What would be your basis for claiming attorneys' fees?
If it gets tossed, it gets tossed. But seems that including fees for damages incurred is a standard procedure, especially if you incur any monetary losses that require a lawyer to settle up - otherwise you aren't made whole, which is the entire point of insurance/lawsuits to begin with.
I'm just asking what your basis would be. Is it something in Chapter 38 of the TCPRC, or something else?
Or are you saying you'd sign and file a pleading with the court that you know is partially frivolous?
If I'm damaged due to the actions of somebody else and it requires me to spend money - whether through a lawyer or other means - to recover my damages, I consider those expenses as part of my damages and will definitely include those costs in the invoice because not doing so means I'm not made whole. And I wouldn't consider such costs as frivolous.
I also know that if you don't ask for something, you'll never get it. Contract negotiation 101 stuff there, which I do on occasion through my career.
But hey, I'm sure you'll find some obscure thing to pick on in that statement as well. Have at it brosephus, go get your jollies off.
Oh, you're not a lawyer. Then I would recommend you not advise the OP on legal matters you know nothing about, like whether or not his attorneys' fees would be recoverable in litigation.
Also, schmellba lecturing someone on arguing about obscure minutia is about as funny as it gets.
I've spent years crafting my reputation, thank you very much.Yelnick McWawa said:"Valuable" is subjective.Sasappis said:
While he is not a lawyer, he is a valuable and longterm contributor to this forum. You are not. Sometimes it is best to just comment that fees likely would not be recoverable here and just move on.
The idea that he's been here a long time has earned him the right to post whatever and however he wants while someone who may be a greener must stifle their opinion is laughable. Especially when the poster in question has the reputation schmellba does.