Quote:
Originally Posted by soares  and did not want to be summoned back up here in six years to give testimony. He would not treat the tree, would not cut it down, and would not accept payment for the walk-through. I do live in New York, the most litiginous state in the worlds most litiginous nation, but are things really this bad? He said if he was summoned, he would not be paid for his time, and would not be compensated for travel or accommodations. This can't be true? |
This is how I see it.
He thinks down the track if the tree stays it may fail or die etc and get blamed for it if he in fact tries to help retain it.
Then on the other hand he may not want to remove it coz he cant/doesn't have the equipment or cant 100% justify it as another arbo might try save it. Then there's an argument as to why he cut it down and he did so coz the paver company did that damage and next thing is you may want to sue the paver company and land him right in the middle of your fight.
So by walking away and not accepting money he has washed his hands of it and given a little free advice.
Not my style though. I'm right out there and would tell it to you the way it is with options either way, retain or remove ... then it's your problem which option you take. I have a client who has an abomination of an ugly tree. when I saw it I recommended removal but she would not have a part of it so I do my best to help the wretched tree live, albeit hazardously. But she knows that and lives with that, however if it did fail it wouldn't do much damage unless you were under it.