Stop listening to your neighbor. Would you give away your vehicle because a neighbor doesn't like how it looks or sounds? Your trees may not be grocery getters or take you to/from work, but they provide a valuable service for your property. You will regret taking down these trees.
His car also isn't causing physical damage to his neighbors property. First this OP needs to tell us what damage is being caused to his neighbors property. Drain lines being crushed? House slab being heaved and cracked? Basement wall leaning or bowing due to roots? Water backing up into neighbors house due to blocked drainage from roots on top of ground.
No, the owner of the property needs to find that info and present it to OP exactly. OP should take care of their own house and when the neighbor sues them in court the judge will tell them what they need to do. Roots on pipes happen all the time, you bring out a guy with a big machine and he cuts the roots out of the pipe. This means that all over the country people have trees and neighbors deal with it.
If the neighbor thinks this is a special situation he should bear 100% of the time and money researching it.
And you're stating that you're illiterate or cannot fathom what you read. I stated that a stone/flagstone/paver path would still have to be swept to remain neat and clean.
Pathways through a garden (grass, stone, otherwise) do not need to be swept. Between your username and boomer-y comments, you're unfortunately memorable.
I do like to be memorable. Actually if you want a path not slimed over with leaf mold, obstructed by overgrown plant life etc yeah you do kind need to keep them swept and clean. Unless you're lazy and uncaring...
That's your answer? A random hypothetical that completely leaves out the PHYSICAL damage part? Having your hyperactive sensibilities impugned is not PHYSICAL damage.
Regarding point one - in some areas, the person who cut the roots can be held liable if the tree dies as a result.
This whole situation needs someone who knows the laws in OPs area.
I liken it to "if the report is for you then you have a trust in the results. Kinda like I'd rather pay for my own home inspection report or appraisal.....
My thought about the arborist was to see if they could 1) validate the neighbors complaint, 2) see if they could do something to mitigate the issue. I should have noted that earlier.
It's not about law. It's about whether the trees can survive the root pruning that could mitigate any alleged damages.
Yes, root pruning is a thing.
Take your time and gather all the facts and ask the right questions.
In this case, you need an arborist who can tell you if doing a root pruning could/would mitigate the alleged damages without causing harm to the trees.
And in California, if the trees won't be harmed by this specific root pruning, your neighbour is entitled to prune those roots up to the property line.
They cannot however, harm or damage your trees in any way.
So, gather the facts, get professional opinions and write out an agreement with your neighbour.
Certified arborist in California here, once upon a time, long, long ago....
That would be because youâre asking Reddit and not a lawyer. Reddit will give you all sorts of different answers and consider the loudest / most frequent to be correct. But not necessarily the case. I have read that you can be held responsible for damages from your trees roots but no recollection of the jurisdiction on that. Google search might turn something up but a lawyer in your area would be the better source, especially against the cost of removing so many trees.
https://www.reddit.com/r/treelaw/comments/1bzzl28/warning_most_people_in_treelaw_are_ignorant_of/
California has exceptions for roots causing property damage.
My parents had this issue. They ignored the neighbor because they loved the trees (60 ft redwoods they had planted themselves 25 years earlier). But it was obvious the roots were buckling the neighbor's driveway. Neighbor sued. The case was settled but our attorney basically said we'd lose if we didn't settle, because the trees had been planted on our property and were causing damage.
People can downvote me all they want. I wish it weren't true either but in reality it's fair.
I live in California also, and he can't make you cut down your trees. If you're worried? Ask a lawyer. My FIL cut down a tree in the alley and had to pay the guy and put in a new tree.
Look into tree law. He's responsible for the roots in his yard. You have no obligation to cut any trees down unless they are dying. He can have the roots that are causing the issue on his property removed if he wishes to do so, at his expense. If you want to be a good neighbor, offer to split that cost with him. If he's an ass about it, just walk away and invest the money you saved on the trees on a good fence.
Get a certified arborist to assess the trees and consult a lawyer about your responsibility past the property line. Mature trees are valuable and expensive to replace.
Don't do it. What kind of problems? Uneven turf? Leaves and branches on his grass? How serious are they. We need more detail about the actual problem with mature, healthy trees.
You should be adamant about your trees. You bought your property because of the beauty they provide your property
Walk your property weekly looking g for signs of suspicious dead grass and take soill samples of any dead grass you notice and put them in a medicine or pickle or any covered jars and save them in case any trees die. Put up trail cams on your property facing the trees, the cameras should face each other too.
You can have the roots pruned at the property line. Most law say your neighbour can. If water with a biostimilant to help with stress. You donât need to cut the trees down. Call an arborist who work on the plant health side.
Is he adamant about paying you for removing the trees? If not, time for an about face. You are greatly reducing your property value. Let him deal with the roots.
>Iâd consider getting a better understanding of your legal duties to your neighbor
California holds the tree owner responsible for damage their roots cause to neighboring property
The law for roots in CA is the same as branches (you may want to consult an attorney). The neighbor can cut back what's over the property line as long as it doesn't cause damage to the tree. The last bit is important as it protects your property from them. You are not responsible for their issues. You don't have to take down the trees. You don't have to pay to protect their property from the tree roots.
I agree; please do not cut down your trees unless they are sick or are endangering property around them. Roots spread and you have no control over them. They donât respect fences or property lines. Do your best, but you are not responsible for what nature does past a certain point.
I have lived through this situation. We have a neighbor who is always trying to make trouble and trees have been an issue. They wanted us to pay for a ditch 12â deep along the fence line and concrete poured into it on our side to keep the roots from spreading. We nicely let them know that they could make that happen on their side of the fence if they thought it was an issue. They went to several attorneys and were told that they didnât have a case when it came to tree roots. The attorneyâs were glad to take their money, but a judge would throw the case out.
I am sorry you are in this situation. Make sure you are sure about the laws in your state.
âGood fences make good neighborsâ is a great saying but sometimes neighbors are not good. I hope you are able to peacefully resolve this without paying legal fees.
There is a defense to the last part though of it causing damage. So yes, you shouldnât go and cut the roots to your neighbors tree because it annoys you. But you can mitigate damage to your own home by cutting back roots damaging your property. The tree and its owner doesnât have an unencumbered claim that their tree trumps all.
âthe neighbor will be compelled to prove that the damage or nuisance caused to his or her property outweighs the value of the tree to the owner. (Booska v. Patel, 24 C.A.4th 1786) That same consideration would apply to roots growing under the neighborâs property that would raise up the neighborâs hardscape.â
[great CA tree law resource](https://aoausa.com/tree-law-all-you-need-to-know-updated-by-dale-alberstone/)
If it kills the tree or makes it unstable/unsafe, you then pay your neighbor for the value of the tree. It's value is determined by a few factors, size, age, species. Can range from a couple thousand dollars, to well over a hundred thousand per tree.
People have lost their homes by killing their neighbors trees.
I think the person I responded to was asking what if someone removes roots on their own side damaging a neighbors tree.
Ie. If your neighbor cut back the roots on his side and did in fact kill your trees. He would owe you a lot of money.
Depends on the reason for removing it. If the reason (to prevent damage to a foundation or hard scape) outweighs the value of the tree, you would not be liable. The best thing to do with these situations is to work with your neighbor and call an arborist. They can advise on whether the tree will be salvageable with certain roots cut in order to prevent damage to neighboring property.
I am from California as well and was president of my HOA and we had this issue. You do not have to cut your trees down! Get someone to put in what is called a root barrier. They will chop the roots that are going into your neighbor's yard and bury a barrier there so that they cannot grow in that direction anymore. Your trees will be fine and they will not ever pass the barrier in the future. Please do not cut down your trees!
id check the laws but im pretty sure you dont need to cut down the trees or remove the roots.
if you want to be nice, agree to allow THEM to have the trees cut down. i wouldnt be paying out of pocket for a problem that isnt mine.
but again, check the tree law.
Are you sure you *can* just remove the trees? Some areas have bylaws depending on the size of tree... Also, never allow a neighbor to dictate your landscaping. They need to go through all the proper channels (government offices etc) before you take on such a huge expense.
It is insanity that you are considering cutting down that many trees. It would be far cheaper and a better all-around decision to dig a trench through a reasonable location on the property to cut the roots that are interfering while still allowing your trees to thrive.
Forget about the roots, you shouldn't even be cutting down *your* trees. That's insanity unless there's a good reason that you haven't explained here. The only reason that would be good enough that I can think of is that the trees are dying and in danger of falling. Is that the case?
Something similar is happening to me right now. I chopped all the roots that were going into the neighbors yard. Didnât touch anything on neighbors side of the fence
I think absent more details itâs a little hard to take a side here. Do you have massive trees whose roots are lifting their foundation? Or do they just want to dig and are annoyed that roots are in the way. The legal stuff is obvs the most important, but ethically / morally I think itâs a bit of a gray area right now, from what youâve written.
We had the same situation with our neighbors trees. They were redwoods and the roots covered half of our backyard. Turns out that in CA if you damage the roots and the tree falls, Your liable. We could not legally remove them.
They were so invasive that they eroded our sidewalk. Ended up putting thick steel flashing vertically in the ground to protect the house foundation. We ended up covering the roots in gravel because they destroyed the plants in the yard. No grass would grow, and you had to be careful where you stepped.
This is why certain trees just shouldn't be allowed to be planted on or within a certain distance of property lines. It would be easier to avoid creating these issues in the first place. It's awful that you have to deal with this at your expense and loss of enjoyment of your own property.
In my experience most mature trees can tolerate loosing a root or two. I wouldn't remove those trees unless there's no other option.
But to answer your specific question, NO you are not responsible for removing roots on your neighbor's property.
I read a lot about this issues but you should look into a lawyer in your area.
BUT my reddit ass answer is, the trees have every right to be there, you have every right to their value and if the roots are causing problems for them they have to find a solution on their land with their money. I think the solution that was given as an example for this same situation was that the neighbor should out of his pocket dig the roots on his side of his property and put some concrete to stop them.
Every state is different on tree laws. Belive it or not, trees have some protection as your property.
California has a huge problem with invasive trees being planted on very very small properties. This isn't about fallen leaves. These roots break your water lines, gas lines, drainage lines, will damage the foundation of your home. And for those of you saying the roots should have been managed? Well how? When u can't see them til damage is done?
And no, it's not the tree.Owners responsibility to pay for the damage at the neighbor's house. I'm just saying these roots are a huge issue at least all throughout southern california. My neighbor actually paid to cut down (i gave permission) a giant tree that was mostly on my side of the property line because he wanted it down so bad because he had spent so much money already repairing problems from those roots. So he paid for the whole thing. These roots can cause upwards of $100k in damages
Iâd check if those trees are protected under California laws. An arborist should be called in to verify remediation.
Also sounds like a great opportunity for a climate/ecology group to get some media coverage.
What issues are your trees causing for your neighbor's property? If this is a neighborhood where driveways are typically close to the property line and your roots are pushing up the neighbor's driveway and the roots can't be removed without killing the trees, then I'd either have the trees removed at neighbor's expense or possibly split the cost. It's just not very neighborly to have big trees that close to the line in that situation. I can't think of any other situation where I'd cut down my healthy trees for a neighbor.
Otherwise ... Maybe consider paying for removal of the most troublesome roots so you can choose who to hire and control exactly what they do, for the sake of preserving the health of the trees. If you leave it for the neighbors to deal with the roots (since it really is their responsibility), I would document what your neighbor does to the roots as much as possible. I might even set up a couple security cameras to record what happens. They could kill those trees by cutting too many/ too large roots and/or poisoning them. That would potentially be tens of thousands worth of damage, and it could take a few years for the trees to really show that they are dying.
Trees donât need to die for that. Please donât cut those trees. Managing tree roots and cement is part of owning a home. He can suck it up and manage his property while trees live on for many decades more.
Iâm in Ohio. We are not responsible for any damage caused by roots on a neighborâs property and also are not responsible for removing them. The neighbor can only take action on roots/ branches in his yard and can not cut anything back to a point it kills the tree.
In other words he canât force you to cut down the trees or fix his property. Personally Iâd tell him to go fuck himself
In the States I've lived, the responsibility of each party stops at the property line. He can deal with the roots/limbs on his side of the fence, you do whatever you want on your side.
I hope you don't cut living trees down for the neighbor.
Our neighbor wanted us to remove trees along our shared fence line, due to leaves dropping on his side.
What did we do?
We had the trees trimmed to his satisfaction.
Then, he went back to wanting them removed because of one or two visible roots on his side.
We said no. Not just because of the cost ($5k for six trees) but because they were homes to lots of birds and such and gave us some degree of privacy.
He threatened to get the HOA involved and I simply stated that it was the HOA that approved each tree/type planted on our property with the sign off of the prior owners.
What did we offer? We would have a tree specialist go into his yard and cut those roots and remove them. And promised to do so in the future if more appeared.
Removing the roots on his side didn't hurt the trees or make them unstable and so far, no more complaints.
The fence needs replacing and we offered to go 50/50 on that but he refused. He seems appy to spend our money and time.
In another state but... a tree across the street put its roots into my sewer pipes. It was me who paid to fix the damage with the first back up, and it was me who paid Roto Rooter quarterly to control the problem.
To be totally fair if my tree was causing serious driveway or foundation issues if be ok with removing it, possibly splitting removal cost. It is just roots in the lawn or pipes i wouldn't. That's a balance between being neighborly and what's a lawful responsibility. It would also depend on the tree and how much i love that particular tree. I definitely wouldn't pay to take down 7 trees for roots in pipes. And he can help pay for removal because it's his pipes.
Check your local laws. In my state, a landowner may trim a neighborâs trees branches from his own side of the fence line. He may also dig up roots from his neighbors trees if they cross onto his property. The remedy, however, is limited to self-help and not detrimental to the tree.
California law is that âNeighbors can trim or cut the trunk, limbs, or roots to upkeep their space, but they can't go over the line. All trimmings should be reasonable and shouldn't harm or kill the tree.â
THIS LACKS CRITICAL DETAILS.. I can't stress that enough
exactly what is the problem here?
Something isn't making sense here if your just willing to cut down all your trees at your exspence,,
Your neighbor could just cut the roots on his side,, it's only a small portion of there total root system
When your neighbor comes on your property to bitch about your roots. Tell him he is trespassing and if needed you will use physical force to remove him from your property. Be done with home. It works.
In California, yes. If it is your tree, it is your legal responsibility to control the roots and mitigate damage to the neighboring property.
My parents just went through this in the North Bay. Unfortunately their giant trees pretty much ruined the neighbor's driveway. My parents had to remove the trees and pay for a new driveway for the neighbors. Their insurance covered part of it.
This is not legal advice. The best time to plant a tree was twenty years ago. The second best time is today. Please donât cut down your trees, and please make sure you have cameras on them because people are weirdos.
Be a good neighbor and take responsibility for your tree. Donât make your neighbors suffer consequences of your tree. You never know what their financial situation is or about their well-being.
Nice to see a kind response here!
As I said elsewhere, this is why trees shouldn't be allowed to be planted on or along property lines to begin with. Branches grow. Roots grow. Why should irresponsible choices of one neighbor be allowed to cause property damage, significant financial responsibility (maintenance), or significant financial liability (loss of tree) to another? It doesn't make sense.
Tree law resources have already been posted, so I'll just add that this is one reason people shouldn't plant certain trees on or along property lines. Not saying OP did - general comment.
Branches grow. Roots grow. And they'll grow over property lines.
It's crazy that someone can plant trees on their property on/along a property line, and if the neighbor trims them in a way that kills them, they are then on the hook financially.
There should be rules against planting so close to begin with - why should a neighbor be allowed to plant trees that encroach on and will potentially/definitely adversely impact the property structures of another, then get financially compensated if said tree dies after being trimmed within reason by a neighbor?
People shouldn't have to be financially liable down the road for someone else's irresponsible choices, and the trees shouldn't have to suffer for it either.
We did not plant the trees. We've been in the house almost three years and the trees are probably 18 years old. I was thinking the same thing. Why would they plant the trees so close to the property line! Maybe they knew they wouldn't be in the house by the time issues occurred. âšď¸
It's a bummer that you now have to deal with this. And maybe... âšď¸ ... the way some homeowners don't care about stuff inside that they figure the next owner(s) can deal with. Hope this comes to the best possible resolution for all!
I wish you were our neighbor. There are three huge poplar trees in the backyard neighbor's house. Three different families have lived there. Not one of them has cared for those trees. In fact, in many cities, poplars are banned because they suffer rot and branches break off. They also have horribly invasive roots.
However, we cannot do much because tree laws say unless the trees are a threat to our property. But, the nasty trees do shoot roots into our tiny lawn. One part of our lawn dies out in the summer, since the roots rob our soil of water and nutrients. I HATE those trees.
Even if we got rid of the lawn (size of a postage stamp), any plants/shrubs we would try to plant would also suffer. Look up what poplars do...to the environment. They grow up to 100+ feet, they shed year round, their roots are very invasive and they rob water from any living plant. As I said before, most cities ban these trees because they are so damaging.
And at my own expense, I have over the years planted a small Japanese cedar tree, a dwarf blue spruce, a large heavenly bamboo shrub (not real bamboo), and a Smokebush which is now more like a tree. Those trees do well because they were planted above our backyard retaining wall, thus it is out of the way of the evil Poplar roots. And I live on a greenbelt. The birds enjoy our yard.
Thanks for the input.
I donât advocate tree violence, but I do know someone who once drilled holes into a neighborâs tree roots and poured bleach. If poplars are that bad, thenâŚ.
If you share a fence with that same neighbor, it may need repair or replacement if is affected by the roots; so be aware of additional costs that may occur from spreading roots.
**A NEIGHBOR WAS RESPONSIBLE** for cutting back branches that hung over and touched their neighbor's roof.
It varies by jurisdiction. I want to say California is one of the areas that you could be liable for damage but unsure if you would have to pay for removal.
post in r/treelaw
There really is a subreddit for everything
No kidding!
That sub Reddit is great. Your trees have rights!
There is a lawyer for everything.
Shoot, Im only an expert in birdlaw
r/birdsarentreal
hat sip whole fear plant tender brave dull thought domineering *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It pains me to even think about cutting them down but he's pretty adamant about the root issue.
Stop listening to your neighbor. Would you give away your vehicle because a neighbor doesn't like how it looks or sounds? Your trees may not be grocery getters or take you to/from work, but they provide a valuable service for your property. You will regret taking down these trees.
His car also isn't causing physical damage to his neighbors property. First this OP needs to tell us what damage is being caused to his neighbors property. Drain lines being crushed? House slab being heaved and cracked? Basement wall leaning or bowing due to roots? Water backing up into neighbors house due to blocked drainage from roots on top of ground.
No, the owner of the property needs to find that info and present it to OP exactly. OP should take care of their own house and when the neighbor sues them in court the judge will tell them what they need to do. Roots on pipes happen all the time, you bring out a guy with a big machine and he cuts the roots out of the pipe. This means that all over the country people have trees and neighbors deal with it. If the neighbor thinks this is a special situation he should bear 100% of the time and money researching it.
https://kjtlaw-news-articles.com/2018/12/19/tree-roots-liability-damages-and-insurance/
Sounds like the neighbor had informed the OP of it yet the OP has yet to share it. Probably doing his best to dodge culpability.
The neighbor is responsible for that, not OP. (Aren't you the one that said native plant gardens need to be swept?)
And you're stating that you're illiterate or cannot fathom what you read. I stated that a stone/flagstone/paver path would still have to be swept to remain neat and clean.
Did you guys just import your landscaping argument from another post? Nice.
Pathways through a garden (grass, stone, otherwise) do not need to be swept. Between your username and boomer-y comments, you're unfortunately memorable.
I do like to be memorable. Actually if you want a path not slimed over with leaf mold, obstructed by overgrown plant life etc yeah you do kind need to keep them swept and clean. Unless you're lazy and uncaring...
Ohhh tough guy!!
A loud peice of shit car can bring the neighborhood values down. Especially when he starts a collection
That's your answer? A random hypothetical that completely leaves out the PHYSICAL damage part? Having your hyperactive sensibilities impugned is not PHYSICAL damage.
đ
alive special dam act aback divide tan entertain onerous rude *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Regarding point one - in some areas, the person who cut the roots can be held liable if the tree dies as a result. This whole situation needs someone who knows the laws in OPs area.
What ^ said....get an arborist and then the neighbor can protect from damaging your trees as they clear the roos from their side of the fence.
existence gullible jobless wrong normal label detail person shame cable *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I liken it to "if the report is for you then you have a trust in the results. Kinda like I'd rather pay for my own home inspection report or appraisal.....
I would consult with an arborist first.
We are but unfortunately, they don't know the laws about roots.
My thought about the arborist was to see if they could 1) validate the neighbors complaint, 2) see if they could do something to mitigate the issue. I should have noted that earlier.
It's not about law. It's about whether the trees can survive the root pruning that could mitigate any alleged damages. Yes, root pruning is a thing. Take your time and gather all the facts and ask the right questions. In this case, you need an arborist who can tell you if doing a root pruning could/would mitigate the alleged damages without causing harm to the trees. And in California, if the trees won't be harmed by this specific root pruning, your neighbour is entitled to prune those roots up to the property line. They cannot however, harm or damage your trees in any way. So, gather the facts, get professional opinions and write out an agreement with your neighbour. Certified arborist in California here, once upon a time, long, long ago....
That would be because youâre asking Reddit and not a lawyer. Reddit will give you all sorts of different answers and consider the loudest / most frequent to be correct. But not necessarily the case. I have read that you can be held responsible for damages from your trees roots but no recollection of the jurisdiction on that. Google search might turn something up but a lawyer in your area would be the better source, especially against the cost of removing so many trees.
Tell him to go fuck himself?
Now thereâs an idea
In California that will not work.
Elaborate.
It causes cancer in California
I've only spent a couple months in Cali but if fucking yourself caused cancer there I'd surely have it
Everything causes cancer in California, don't you read all the warning labels?
https://www.reddit.com/r/treelaw/comments/1bzzl28/warning_most_people_in_treelaw_are_ignorant_of/ California has exceptions for roots causing property damage.
My parents had this issue. They ignored the neighbor because they loved the trees (60 ft redwoods they had planted themselves 25 years earlier). But it was obvious the roots were buckling the neighbor's driveway. Neighbor sued. The case was settled but our attorney basically said we'd lose if we didn't settle, because the trees had been planted on our property and were causing damage. People can downvote me all they want. I wish it weren't true either but in reality it's fair.
A key difference here would be that they planted the trees themselves. IANAL but I could see that being the problem.
He can kick rocks Nature
I live in California also, and he can't make you cut down your trees. If you're worried? Ask a lawyer. My FIL cut down a tree in the alley and had to pay the guy and put in a new tree.
Look into tree law. He's responsible for the roots in his yard. You have no obligation to cut any trees down unless they are dying. He can have the roots that are causing the issue on his property removed if he wishes to do so, at his expense. If you want to be a good neighbor, offer to split that cost with him. If he's an ass about it, just walk away and invest the money you saved on the trees on a good fence.
Don't split the cost. Neighbor is already trying to bully OP. Just walk away.
So? You don't have to listen to him.
Get a certified arborist to assess the trees and consult a lawyer about your responsibility past the property line. Mature trees are valuable and expensive to replace.
Don't do it. What kind of problems? Uneven turf? Leaves and branches on his grass? How serious are they. We need more detail about the actual problem with mature, healthy trees.
Normally the issue is broken water and gas pipes as well as drainage pipes and it can fuck up your foundation
Get an arborist's opinion!
I was so surprised I had to go this far down for this comment.
Some trees may survive some root cutting. Talk to an arborist. I had to fix my driveway and remove some pine tree roots, for example.
Tell him no.... It's not on you to sacrifice your property to make him happy. If he wants a place without trees,the is free to move.
You should be adamant about your trees. You bought your property because of the beauty they provide your property Walk your property weekly looking g for signs of suspicious dead grass and take soill samples of any dead grass you notice and put them in a medicine or pickle or any covered jars and save them in case any trees die. Put up trail cams on your property facing the trees, the cameras should face each other too.
You can have the roots pruned at the property line. Most law say your neighbour can. If water with a biostimilant to help with stress. You donât need to cut the trees down. Call an arborist who work on the plant health side.
Is he adamant about paying you for removing the trees? If not, time for an about face. You are greatly reducing your property value. Let him deal with the roots.
Check with r/treelaw
I'm not cutting my trees. Now he's taking me to court. What a jerk.
Oh lord! Thatâs crazy. Iâm so sorry you have to deal with this. Such a hassle you probably didnât need.
But itâs on your property, right? Why does his opinion matter?
>Iâd consider getting a better understanding of your legal duties to your neighbor California holds the tree owner responsible for damage their roots cause to neighboring property
alleged squalid ripe worthless lip apparatus person edge complete juggle *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>Wow, itâs interesting you felt the need to chime in here and actually subtract knowledge from the discussion.
The law for roots in CA is the same as branches (you may want to consult an attorney). The neighbor can cut back what's over the property line as long as it doesn't cause damage to the tree. The last bit is important as it protects your property from them. You are not responsible for their issues. You don't have to take down the trees. You don't have to pay to protect their property from the tree roots.
Thank you!
Please don't cut them down. Your neighbor is just trying to bully you instead of investing themselves in what is their problem, not yours.
I agree; please do not cut down your trees unless they are sick or are endangering property around them. Roots spread and you have no control over them. They donât respect fences or property lines. Do your best, but you are not responsible for what nature does past a certain point. I have lived through this situation. We have a neighbor who is always trying to make trouble and trees have been an issue. They wanted us to pay for a ditch 12â deep along the fence line and concrete poured into it on our side to keep the roots from spreading. We nicely let them know that they could make that happen on their side of the fence if they thought it was an issue. They went to several attorneys and were told that they didnât have a case when it came to tree roots. The attorneyâs were glad to take their money, but a judge would throw the case out. I am sorry you are in this situation. Make sure you are sure about the laws in your state. âGood fences make good neighborsâ is a great saying but sometimes neighbors are not good. I hope you are able to peacefully resolve this without paying legal fees.
Tree roots in pipes is just normal maintenance in many parts of the US, need to do it every few years, whole companies that only do this one thing.
There is a defense to the last part though of it causing damage. So yes, you shouldnât go and cut the roots to your neighbors tree because it annoys you. But you can mitigate damage to your own home by cutting back roots damaging your property. The tree and its owner doesnât have an unencumbered claim that their tree trumps all. âthe neighbor will be compelled to prove that the damage or nuisance caused to his or her property outweighs the value of the tree to the owner. (Booska v. Patel, 24 C.A.4th 1786) That same consideration would apply to roots growing under the neighborâs property that would raise up the neighborâs hardscape.â [great CA tree law resource](https://aoausa.com/tree-law-all-you-need-to-know-updated-by-dale-alberstone/)
What if removing a root on your side does in fact damage the tree?
Then you can potentially be liable for the tree. This is very situational.
What if the root has caused your retaining wall to collapse and your driveway to crack and raise several inches.
Then you have been neglecting your property for years???
I mean you donât know where roots are until theyâre causing damage
It's unlikely that damage happened overnight
Roots are usually found near trees.
If it kills the tree or makes it unstable/unsafe, you then pay your neighbor for the value of the tree. It's value is determined by a few factors, size, age, species. Can range from a couple thousand dollars, to well over a hundred thousand per tree. People have lost their homes by killing their neighbors trees.
It's my tree.
This isn't about you anymore, OP!
I think the person I responded to was asking what if someone removes roots on their own side damaging a neighbors tree. Ie. If your neighbor cut back the roots on his side and did in fact kill your trees. He would owe you a lot of money.
Depends on the reason for removing it. If the reason (to prevent damage to a foundation or hard scape) outweighs the value of the tree, you would not be liable. The best thing to do with these situations is to work with your neighbor and call an arborist. They can advise on whether the tree will be salvageable with certain roots cut in order to prevent damage to neighboring property.
If the reason outweighs the value of the tree, it may be worth it to you. But it doesn't automatically absolve you of liability.
Really, even if the roots are coming up on the neighbors side and causing issues?
>You are not responsible for their issues. Except in California
https://cutitrighttreeservicefresno.com/2023/05/21/california-tree-root-damage-law/
No.
Thereâs a sub for this! r/treelaw
I am from California as well and was president of my HOA and we had this issue. You do not have to cut your trees down! Get someone to put in what is called a root barrier. They will chop the roots that are going into your neighbor's yard and bury a barrier there so that they cannot grow in that direction anymore. Your trees will be fine and they will not ever pass the barrier in the future. Please do not cut down your trees!
And no, you are not responsible for the roots in their yard.
Don't cut down your trees (and thus diminish your home's value) to avoid standing up to a rude neighbor.
id check the laws but im pretty sure you dont need to cut down the trees or remove the roots. if you want to be nice, agree to allow THEM to have the trees cut down. i wouldnt be paying out of pocket for a problem that isnt mine. but again, check the tree law.
OP please don't allow them to cut down the trees. It's completely unnecessary.
Are you sure you *can* just remove the trees? Some areas have bylaws depending on the size of tree... Also, never allow a neighbor to dictate your landscaping. They need to go through all the proper channels (government offices etc) before you take on such a huge expense.
It is insanity that you are considering cutting down that many trees. It would be far cheaper and a better all-around decision to dig a trench through a reasonable location on the property to cut the roots that are interfering while still allowing your trees to thrive.
Forget about the roots, you shouldn't even be cutting down *your* trees. That's insanity unless there's a good reason that you haven't explained here. The only reason that would be good enough that I can think of is that the trees are dying and in danger of falling. Is that the case?
There is the potential for the tree roots to damage our pool eventually. That's the only reason we are considering cutting them. It's a nightmare.
Consider a root barrier for that. We had one installed long ago to protect our foundation from a large oak.
Interesting idea. Is that expensive?
It was long ago - my father had it installed. I'm sure it wasn't cheap but trees and pools are valuable.
Less expensive than the property value you set on fire cutting down your mature trees.
No.
No
I'd find a local arborist and have them come out. No way I'd cut down 7 trees on my property for the neighbor.
[great CA tree law resource](https://aoausa.com/tree-law-all-you-need-to-know-updated-by-dale-alberstone/)
Those roots are considered an act of god. Tell your neighbor to take it up with them
Donât cut the trees!! They canât compel you to!!
Something similar is happening to me right now. I chopped all the roots that were going into the neighbors yard. Didnât touch anything on neighbors side of the fence
I think absent more details itâs a little hard to take a side here. Do you have massive trees whose roots are lifting their foundation? Or do they just want to dig and are annoyed that roots are in the way. The legal stuff is obvs the most important, but ethically / morally I think itâs a bit of a gray area right now, from what youâve written.
We had the same situation with our neighbors trees. They were redwoods and the roots covered half of our backyard. Turns out that in CA if you damage the roots and the tree falls, Your liable. We could not legally remove them. They were so invasive that they eroded our sidewalk. Ended up putting thick steel flashing vertically in the ground to protect the house foundation. We ended up covering the roots in gravel because they destroyed the plants in the yard. No grass would grow, and you had to be careful where you stepped.
This is why certain trees just shouldn't be allowed to be planted on or within a certain distance of property lines. It would be easier to avoid creating these issues in the first place. It's awful that you have to deal with this at your expense and loss of enjoyment of your own property.
In my experience most mature trees can tolerate loosing a root or two. I wouldn't remove those trees unless there's no other option. But to answer your specific question, NO you are not responsible for removing roots on your neighbor's property.
I wouldn't have agreed to cut down the trees without first talking to a lawyer. Especially in CA where shade is invaluable.
I read a lot about this issues but you should look into a lawyer in your area. BUT my reddit ass answer is, the trees have every right to be there, you have every right to their value and if the roots are causing problems for them they have to find a solution on their land with their money. I think the solution that was given as an example for this same situation was that the neighbor should out of his pocket dig the roots on his side of his property and put some concrete to stop them. Every state is different on tree laws. Belive it or not, trees have some protection as your property.
California has a huge problem with invasive trees being planted on very very small properties. This isn't about fallen leaves. These roots break your water lines, gas lines, drainage lines, will damage the foundation of your home. And for those of you saying the roots should have been managed? Well how? When u can't see them til damage is done? And no, it's not the tree.Owners responsibility to pay for the damage at the neighbor's house. I'm just saying these roots are a huge issue at least all throughout southern california. My neighbor actually paid to cut down (i gave permission) a giant tree that was mostly on my side of the property line because he wanted it down so bad because he had spent so much money already repairing problems from those roots. So he paid for the whole thing. These roots can cause upwards of $100k in damages
Iâd check if those trees are protected under California laws. An arborist should be called in to verify remediation. Also sounds like a great opportunity for a climate/ecology group to get some media coverage.
What issues are your trees causing for your neighbor's property? If this is a neighborhood where driveways are typically close to the property line and your roots are pushing up the neighbor's driveway and the roots can't be removed without killing the trees, then I'd either have the trees removed at neighbor's expense or possibly split the cost. It's just not very neighborly to have big trees that close to the line in that situation. I can't think of any other situation where I'd cut down my healthy trees for a neighbor. Otherwise ... Maybe consider paying for removal of the most troublesome roots so you can choose who to hire and control exactly what they do, for the sake of preserving the health of the trees. If you leave it for the neighbors to deal with the roots (since it really is their responsibility), I would document what your neighbor does to the roots as much as possible. I might even set up a couple security cameras to record what happens. They could kill those trees by cutting too many/ too large roots and/or poisoning them. That would potentially be tens of thousands worth of damage, and it could take a few years for the trees to really show that they are dying.
The roots are invading their yard and damaging some cement work but in the back yard. Thanks for the feedback.
Trees donât need to die for that. Please donât cut those trees. Managing tree roots and cement is part of owning a home. He can suck it up and manage his property while trees live on for many decades more.
Someone suggested root barrier. Going to look into that.
For YOUR potential issues with your pool, have at it. Your neighbor is responsible for their own property/root issues.
Iâm in Ohio. We are not responsible for any damage caused by roots on a neighborâs property and also are not responsible for removing them. The neighbor can only take action on roots/ branches in his yard and can not cut anything back to a point it kills the tree. In other words he canât force you to cut down the trees or fix his property. Personally Iâd tell him to go fuck himself
In the States I've lived, the responsibility of each party stops at the property line. He can deal with the roots/limbs on his side of the fence, you do whatever you want on your side. I hope you don't cut living trees down for the neighbor.
R/treelaw
No, and you're not responsible for cutting down your trees either. They can deal with the roots on their side.
Our neighbor wanted us to remove trees along our shared fence line, due to leaves dropping on his side. What did we do? We had the trees trimmed to his satisfaction. Then, he went back to wanting them removed because of one or two visible roots on his side. We said no. Not just because of the cost ($5k for six trees) but because they were homes to lots of birds and such and gave us some degree of privacy. He threatened to get the HOA involved and I simply stated that it was the HOA that approved each tree/type planted on our property with the sign off of the prior owners. What did we offer? We would have a tree specialist go into his yard and cut those roots and remove them. And promised to do so in the future if more appeared. Removing the roots on his side didn't hurt the trees or make them unstable and so far, no more complaints. The fence needs replacing and we offered to go 50/50 on that but he refused. He seems appy to spend our money and time.
You can cut it down, but the roots can continue to grow.
In another state but... a tree across the street put its roots into my sewer pipes. It was me who paid to fix the damage with the first back up, and it was me who paid Roto Rooter quarterly to control the problem.
You likely do not have to cut down ANY trees whatsoever, it would be very bad for your home value.
No
To be totally fair if my tree was causing serious driveway or foundation issues if be ok with removing it, possibly splitting removal cost. It is just roots in the lawn or pipes i wouldn't. That's a balance between being neighborly and what's a lawful responsibility. It would also depend on the tree and how much i love that particular tree. I definitely wouldn't pay to take down 7 trees for roots in pipes. And he can help pay for removal because it's his pipes.
Check your local laws. In my state, a landowner may trim a neighborâs trees branches from his own side of the fence line. He may also dig up roots from his neighbors trees if they cross onto his property. The remedy, however, is limited to self-help and not detrimental to the tree. California law is that âNeighbors can trim or cut the trunk, limbs, or roots to upkeep their space, but they can't go over the line. All trimmings should be reasonable and shouldn't harm or kill the tree.â
THIS LACKS CRITICAL DETAILS.. I can't stress that enough exactly what is the problem here? Something isn't making sense here if your just willing to cut down all your trees at your exspence,, Your neighbor could just cut the roots on his side,, it's only a small portion of there total root system
r/treelaw
When your neighbor comes on your property to bitch about your roots. Tell him he is trespassing and if needed you will use physical force to remove him from your property. Be done with home. It works.
Why are you cutting down 7 healthy trees???? Your neighbor can take a long walk off a short pier!
In California, yes. If it is your tree, it is your legal responsibility to control the roots and mitigate damage to the neighboring property. My parents just went through this in the North Bay. Unfortunately their giant trees pretty much ruined the neighbor's driveway. My parents had to remove the trees and pay for a new driveway for the neighbors. Their insurance covered part of it.
Thank you!
It's called Nature! Also take time to find out if the trees are on a protected list first?
This is not legal advice. The best time to plant a tree was twenty years ago. The second best time is today. Please donât cut down your trees, and please make sure you have cameras on them because people are weirdos.
Be a good neighbor and take responsibility for your tree. Donât make your neighbors suffer consequences of your tree. You never know what their financial situation is or about their well-being.
Nice to see a kind response here! As I said elsewhere, this is why trees shouldn't be allowed to be planted on or along property lines to begin with. Branches grow. Roots grow. Why should irresponsible choices of one neighbor be allowed to cause property damage, significant financial responsibility (maintenance), or significant financial liability (loss of tree) to another? It doesn't make sense.
Tree law resources have already been posted, so I'll just add that this is one reason people shouldn't plant certain trees on or along property lines. Not saying OP did - general comment. Branches grow. Roots grow. And they'll grow over property lines. It's crazy that someone can plant trees on their property on/along a property line, and if the neighbor trims them in a way that kills them, they are then on the hook financially. There should be rules against planting so close to begin with - why should a neighbor be allowed to plant trees that encroach on and will potentially/definitely adversely impact the property structures of another, then get financially compensated if said tree dies after being trimmed within reason by a neighbor? People shouldn't have to be financially liable down the road for someone else's irresponsible choices, and the trees shouldn't have to suffer for it either.
We did not plant the trees. We've been in the house almost three years and the trees are probably 18 years old. I was thinking the same thing. Why would they plant the trees so close to the property line! Maybe they knew they wouldn't be in the house by the time issues occurred. âšď¸
It's a bummer that you now have to deal with this. And maybe... âšď¸ ... the way some homeowners don't care about stuff inside that they figure the next owner(s) can deal with. Hope this comes to the best possible resolution for all!
Thank you so much!
I wish you were our neighbor. There are three huge poplar trees in the backyard neighbor's house. Three different families have lived there. Not one of them has cared for those trees. In fact, in many cities, poplars are banned because they suffer rot and branches break off. They also have horribly invasive roots. However, we cannot do much because tree laws say unless the trees are a threat to our property. But, the nasty trees do shoot roots into our tiny lawn. One part of our lawn dies out in the summer, since the roots rob our soil of water and nutrients. I HATE those trees.
Please consider another point of view. Your lawn is robbing trees and native plants of water and nutrients. Lawns are the WORST for the environment.
Even if we got rid of the lawn (size of a postage stamp), any plants/shrubs we would try to plant would also suffer. Look up what poplars do...to the environment. They grow up to 100+ feet, they shed year round, their roots are very invasive and they rob water from any living plant. As I said before, most cities ban these trees because they are so damaging. And at my own expense, I have over the years planted a small Japanese cedar tree, a dwarf blue spruce, a large heavenly bamboo shrub (not real bamboo), and a Smokebush which is now more like a tree. Those trees do well because they were planted above our backyard retaining wall, thus it is out of the way of the evil Poplar roots. And I live on a greenbelt. The birds enjoy our yard.
Dude poplars are awful, I don't blame them.
Thanks for the input. I donât advocate tree violence, but I do know someone who once drilled holes into a neighborâs tree roots and poured bleach. If poplars are that bad, thenâŚ.
If you share a fence with that same neighbor, it may need repair or replacement if is affected by the roots; so be aware of additional costs that may occur from spreading roots. **A NEIGHBOR WAS RESPONSIBLE** for cutting back branches that hung over and touched their neighbor's roof.
Did you move in recently or did they? How long have both of you been neighbors for
It varies by jurisdiction. I want to say California is one of the areas that you could be liable for damage but unsure if you would have to pay for removal.
Downvoted for being correct. CA does hold tree owner liable save for certain situations (government entities)
That is Reddit for ya lol. People like straight answers and for it always to be the same.
r/treelaw yall