AggieChemist said:
Generally speaking, I resent anyone or anything that causes me to agree extensively with or feel empathy for schmellba99.
So piss off you cookie wanker.
That was my exact feeling on it.
AggieChemist said:
Generally speaking, I resent anyone or anything that causes me to agree extensively with or feel empathy for schmellba99.
So piss off you cookie wanker.
I send these letters via certified and US mail. They can refuse to pick up a certified but I've never had a problem in court using this method. Not only did they get the letter but they look petty and even worse in front of a judge/jury for refusing to accept the certified.ntxaggie said:
OP, many people that avoid certified mail will still accept and sign for a FedEx envelope. Costs a little more, but you will have proof that they received what you sent.
rootube said:
Tell your neighbor that you are going to hire someone to cut down the tree and that they will be on his property on a certain date and will need access. After the tree is down (Or before/during) you can discuss payment. He may pay part of it or none of it but the cost of removing the tree may preferable to a fight with your neighbor plus legal costs. If he does not agree to give access then get a lawyer. I would consider a lawyer the very last resort. If you pursue legal remedy you may end up paying the lawyer the tree service money and now you have a neighbor who is your mortal enemy. Sucks but it sounds like you are the one who wants the tree gone and he could care less.
Letting them win and take advantage of me is a hard pill to swallow. I'm about done with being screwed over by shady and irresponsible people.Sasappis said:Locknload said:
Well after 4 pages I thought the first idea had been decided against by OP. I did not suggest filing suit and seeking injunctive relief should be the first option, but it is possible as a last resort. Thought I would offer after reading all of the legal advice being tossed around in this post.
As I am sure you are aware, a suit and service doesn't require thousands of dollars and may get the neighbor to pay attention. You can use it to come to an agreement and dismiss the suit. The suit is intended to get the tree down if all else fails.
You are right that it is the best legal option, it is just expensive.
I would say $1000 to $1500 to get a suit on file is a reasonable guesstimate. Probably the best he will find is a $2500 retainer. Some folks would want $5k before they got involved. Cutting down the tree is cheaper.
This is why I have insurance and God created subrogation.Sasappis said:AggieChemist said:
I'd be Got-damned if I would pay to cut down a nuisance tree that didn't belong to me.
Is it better to pay to cut it down today or deal with having to repair everything it destroys when it falls?
People suck and those that will not do what is necessary cause problems for others.
AggieChemist said:
Generally speaking, I resent anyone or anything that causes me to agree extensively with or feel empathy for schmellba99.
So piss off you cookie wanker.
trouble said:AggieChemist said:
Generally speaking, I resent anyone or anything that causes me to agree extensively with or feel empathy for schmellba99.
So piss off you cookie wanker.
That was my exact feeling on it.
But then your insurance rates go up as a result of the [in]action of somebody else. You still lose.AggieChemist said:This is why I have insurance and God created subrogation.Sasappis said:AggieChemist said:
I'd be Got-damned if I would pay to cut down a nuisance tree that didn't belong to me.
Is it better to pay to cut it down today or deal with having to repair everything it destroys when it falls?
People suck and those that will not do what is necessary cause problems for others.
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.
I got paid to do tree work, but I'm far from being a professional. I just know that anytime you think you have it figured out, tied off, pulled away, under control, etc., you don't and crazy stuff will happen. A trunk that size, even near the top, is got damn heavy and will likely do serious damage.aggieforester05 said:
If I had a long reach skytrack could I push it back towards their yard and snap it off or do you think I risk the canopy snapping off above the forks and falling back on the skytrack? I'd have to take down a section of fence, but I think I could get a skytrack in there. Might be cheaper and safer than a tree cutter trying to climb that dead wood.
I'd argue that letting a known potential hazard sit is a little different than your example - to me it's more akin to having a swimming pool without a protective fence around it or a construction excavation without safety fencing. It's a known nuisance and danger, and if you know it is a nuisance and danger you can't use the "well, I had no clue" defense.91AggieLawyer 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.
The reason the lawyer hasn't sent that letter is that it would be like sending you a letter warning you that if you drove erratically tomorrow morning AND wrecked into his client AND caused his client injury, they'd be all over you. It is way too speculative. I'm unaware of any legal duty a property owner owe another one to cut down a tree, even a dead one. Saying something COULD cause harm is like the potential auto accident above.
Anyway, what would you do if you got a demand letter like this? Cower in fear or throw it in the trash? What if you either couldn't afford to take down the tree or for whatever other reason had no intention of doing so?
91AggieLawyer said:
The reason the lawyer hasn't sent that letter is that it would be like sending you a letter warning you that if you drove erratically tomorrow morning AND wrecked into his client AND caused his client injury, they'd be all over you. It is way too speculative. I'm unaware of any legal duty a property owner owe another one to cut down a tree, even a dead one. Saying something COULD cause harm is like the potential auto accident above.
Anyway, what would you do if you got a demand letter like this? Cower in fear or throw it in the trash? What if you either couldn't afford to take down the tree or for whatever other reason had no intention of doing so?
Burdizzo said:rootube said:
Tell your neighbor that you are going to hire someone to cut down the tree and that they will be on his property on a certain date and will need access. After the tree is down (Or before/during) you can discuss payment. He may pay part of it or none of it but the cost of removing the tree may preferable to a fight with your neighbor plus legal costs. If he does not agree to give access then get a lawyer. I would consider a lawyer the very last resort. If you pursue legal remedy you may end up paying the lawyer the tree service money and now you have a neighbor who is your mortal enemy. Sucks but it sounds like you are the one who wants the tree gone and he could care less.
This is a terribly bad idea.
First, going on someone else's property to do work like this without proper permission opens you up to criminal activity. You and your agent are on his property destroying something that belongs to him without him agreeing to it.
Second, if something bad happens as a result of you or your contractor, you are now on the wrong end of the problem.
Third, no contractor with a lick of business sense is going to agree to do this.
This is literally the first step in what I am calling my brilliant plan to deal with your neighbor that I have no particular experience with or knowledge about but am willing to throw out ideas out like they were chips at a casino. Who the hell knows maybe the guy is too lazy to hire it out and he says great. My whole point is that a lawyer should be the very last resort and will bring equal parts expense and aggravation. As long as there is still an avenue to discuss with the neighbor that is the best path and I am an expert tree surgeon so my words carry weight in the dead tree community even if they are grammatically incorrect as NRD09 has so painfully pointed out.Quote:
Tell your neighbor that you are going to hire someone to cut down the tree
rootube said:Burdizzo said:rootube said:
Tell your neighbor that you are going to hire someone to cut down the tree and that they will be on his property on a certain date and will need access. After the tree is down (Or before/during) you can discuss payment. He may pay part of it or none of it but the cost of removing the tree may preferable to a fight with your neighbor plus legal costs. If he does not agree to give access then get a lawyer. I would consider a lawyer the very last resort. If you pursue legal remedy you may end up paying the lawyer the tree service money and now you have a neighbor who is your mortal enemy. Sucks but it sounds like you are the one who wants the tree gone and he could care less.
This is a terribly bad idea.
First, going on someone else's property to do work like this without proper permission opens you up to criminal activity. You and your agent are on his property destroying something that belongs to him without him agreeing to it.
Second, if something bad happens as a result of you or your contractor, you are now on the wrong end of the problem.
Third, no contractor with a lick of business sense is going to agree to do this.This is literally the first step in what I am calling my brilliant plan to deal with your neighbor that I have no particular experience with or knowledge about but am willing to throw out ideas out like they were chips at a casino. Who the hell knows maybe the guy is too lazy to hire it out and he says great. My whole point is that a lawyer should be the very last resort and will bring equal parts expense and aggravation. As long as there is still an avenue to discuss with the neighbor that is the best path and I am an expert tree surgeon so my words carry weight.Quote:
Tell your neighbor that you are going to hire someone to cut down the tree