Queensland Australia Fence Line Law

Eric Frei

Trees and plants


Extract for those unable to follow.

Overhanging branches and roots constitute a legal nuisance. The owner of the land on which the plant grows is liable for damage caused. Tenants are not usually liable unless they have planted the plant.

A neighbour affected can raise the matter with the neighbour directly

seek assistance for mediation from the Dispute Resolution Centres

abate the nuisance by cutting off overhanging branches and digging up roots on their property as long as they take care not to cause unnecessary damage to the plant. The overhanging branches and fruit belong to the owner of the tree, they may be returned to the owner or, with the owner's permission, disposed of. Unless the neighbour agrees to pay the cost of removal beforehand, it is necessary to take court action to recover any cost and legal advice should be obtained

commence court proceedings for damages or an injunction, and legal advice should be obtained.

A tree owner may also be liable under the ordinary principles of negligence.

FruitBelongs to the owner of the tree or plant on which it grows.


Fence line trees are the cause of many disputes, and even council gets caught up in the red tape of many laws. The above over rides local law as is a state law, however if the tree is protected then it's another kettle of fish but the responsibility is still on the trunk owner.

Also, there's this. Source: Department of Justice and the Attorney General : Trees

__________________

Eric Frei

This is a fence line prune I did today out on acreage.

The fenceline for the property on the left is where the customer drives to the rear of the block to park his boat.

The trees planted on the neighbours side are about 2m off the fenceline at the bottom (LiquidAmbers) and 1m at the top end (Fiddlewoods).

The customer wanted no branches scraping or hitting his vehicle or boat.

We were able to access the trees on the tree owners side and prune back to trunk etc, called target cuts. That is better for the tree and prevent regrowth in most cases.

We did this to a height of 7m as the trees did hang down so this will last for quite some time, but please bear in mind the customer could have cut them back for the entire height of the tree, so no parts came over the fenceline ... but he didn't.

It's important you consider your neighbours and their rights to uninterrupted use of their land, selecting species which will be contained within your boundary is wise. You know planting a tree with a canopy spread of 20m only 2m away from a fence will result in trespassing parts, same for the roots.

In this landscape the selection of trees was poor and a columnar variety or shorter more compact tree would have created the desired fence line screen without trespass or pruning.

Attached Thumbnails

 

__________________

TreeDimensional

Nice job Ekka, it kind of makes you feel good when you can work to resolve an issue between two neighbor,doesn't it. Did the property owners jump through a bunch of the hoops or did they man-up and get on with it?

Looks like they should of had you go down to the end of the fenceline and have a look at the two trees at the corner.

Therrin

How likely is it that the "neighbor" could have the roots dug up on their property and *not* have it unnecessarily damage the plant? Would that be like selecting a specific root that is causing a specific problem?

Eric Frei

Well, these two neighbours co-operated well.

About roots, here's a good example and could happen. The guy on the left tows his big boat along that fenceline to the rear of the yard. It's a slight uphill grade and the truck/chipper had a hard time on that lawn spinning wheels.

Now imagine if the guy on the left wants to concrete a driveway along there and in the process digs down the 125mm for concrete, he will damage roots.

That's the things you need to consider when planting out fencelines.

In this instance there were no surface roots, nothing to see, but if they were ficus or tipuana trees then there'd be hell to pay!

__________________

newguy18

so basically in queensland if one neighbor wanted to get picky they could have all the limbs overhanging there side of the fence cut off and all the roots cut out unless the tree is protected?

__________________
Have your say join us today.


old schooler

Eric Frei

Dead right.

__________________

newguy18

dang thats bad.

__________________
Have your say join us today.


old schooler

Eric Frei

Why is it bad, I think it's good.

__________________

TrevMcRev

Its bad because a perfectly good tree can be caused extensive permernant damage without consultation.

The case you showed seemed fair, but too often this is done over trivial issues like leaves falling

Geez thats nature, thats the beauty of trees, yet coz some anal retentive cant cope with sweeping up a few leaves on the ground they butcher the neighbours tree.

Thinking it is ok to cut up to 50% of the canopy and 50% of the roots off a fenceline tree and not give a stuff it it dies or falls over as a result is not exactly caring about trees.

How could you be so anti-lopping but think treating trees this way is fine?

Eric Frei

Oh, I thought it was about appropriate planting, one could say the planter is extremely negligent in forcing their desires beyond their boundaries.

Could I build a structure that encroached up to say 100' high half way across your back yard? I bet the answer would be no.

However, you can plant a tree that does.

In England this is what feuding neighbours do with Leylandii Cypress hedges and they actually had to bring in the Anti Social Behavioural Act/Trees.

Anal is some-one forcing their desires upon me, correct tree, correct place and maintaining it is the right thing to do. Obviously for the purpose of the discussion we're not referring to special trees perhaps that were retained for development etc. We are talking typical urban instances.

Making assumptions that the pruning work would in each instance destabilize or kill the tree is also rather preemptive, I can easily say that up here almost any tree would survive it no worries within reasonable terms. Also remember we are not talking about protected trees.

Why would you plant a 20m wide species close to your fence?

Just today, 2 quotes, 2 fencline jobs and arguing neighbours. One the customer is 84 years old and the neighbours LillyPilly is planted 1m away from the fence, totally covers her driveway, rubs on her roof and drops a heap of red berries where she manages to shuffle around. She asked the neighbour to prune it etc but the neighbour told her to piss off. So due to the argument she got a lawnmower man to hack off a few branches and threw them back onto the tree owners side of the fence ... the dead branches are still lying there the neibs dont give a stuff. I asked the lady to call her local councillor and have them come out and see the BS that tree owners think they have the rights to subject elderly people to ... the victim, the person who is undergoing the tresspass, an 84 year old woman has to pay for the maintenance of the neighbours tree. That doesn't gel with me either. I couldn't call her anal retentive though.

__________________

ozinus

I am an Arborist recently back in Australia after having worked in the north east United States for the last six years. One thing that immediately drew my attention back in Australia was the ridiculous want of ownership to be denoted by a fence.
What is wrong with natural borders. Most of MA and NH and surrounding states have no fences between properties yet share a common garden bed replete with shade and ornamental plantings beneficial to both yards. If we ever have our clients ear perhaps more of these sorts of ideas could be suggested to our customers. Imagine a far more open park type feel to a neighbourhood. We all know where our property ends and if there is dispute it's nothing a survey can't fix. Half the time the fences are wrong anyway.

newguy18

welcome.

__________________
Have your say join us today.


old schooler

TrevMcRev

Have noticed that style of garden common on US tv shows and always thought it was great.
Seems like lots of big open lawns with large specimen trees rather than garden beds full of everything.
Any work pics from your time there?

ozinus

No and it's a long winded story why. A link to my old website is in my profile.

Eric Frei

Great point, extremely interesting.

I'll tell you why in explicit detail.

In 1993 I bought a house in the Gold Coast shire (hinterland region new subdivision).

The developer tried to create the open style of feeling and planted out (like you said) the property boundaries with a joint style of garden, not too bad a tree/plant selection either.

Anyway, as time passed (I lived there 5 years) people wanted more privacy, after all whilst you were havin a BBQ with rellies who'd want peering neibs right. So up started going the fences.

Cut a long story short we also decided to fence. What was the most common type of fencing in the area was the ole 3 rail 1.8m high timber paling fence. Both our side neighbours fenced and we paid half. Our back neighbours (note the plural) one went halves the other "dug in" and refused to even allow fencing. Our property across the back had two rear neighbours so imagine half our rear yard fenced and all sides fenced.

Before you knew it we were in court, that back neighbour was a stubborn Polish wanker. I stood on my house roof a took pics 360 degrees of our yard. It showed all fences and the gap where the Polish lived, ironically the Polished fence all their yard except for that gap with exactly the same fence ... that was easily seen in the pictures too you know.

So off to court we went.

The judge saw the pictures and saw the stupidity of the Polish neighbour. The Polish neighbour argued that the developer wanted open space and no fences etc ...

... the judge concluded IT WAS EVERYBODY'S RIGHT IN AUSTRALIA TO FENCE THEIR LAND WITH WHAT IS DEEMED COMMON FENCING AROUND THEM. Due to the pics it was deemed that 3 rail paling 1.8m high fencing was appropriate and the Polish guy was given a notice to fence within 30 days and pay 50% there of. END OF STORY.

What this whole thing is about is multiple rights beside that of trees. There's laws, regulations, civil disputes, duty of care, negligence, rights to privacy, trespass etc .... and trees are a renewable resource unlike oil or coal in our lifetime. I play devils advocate for various reasons because a one attitude or opinion fits all is fascist!

__________________

Steve Tipton

What about remnant natural trees in this context?

__________________
Heightmaster

Eric Frei

All removed, no remnant wattles or eucs, nothing.

__________________

ozinus

I don't think anybody would argue the right of being able to fence property. My point is that for the sake of allowing trees to grow to their full potential barriers get in the way. This concept may be a little beyond urban society currently as the fear of large trees is still a great plague upon which tree companies utilize fear for monetary gain. A tree is not a toy or as Dave Hughes might say " It's not just for christmas" . It is not an acceptable practice for me to take the legs of a St Bernard because it got a little bigger than I thought it would. Nor is it customary for a doctor to malpractice with their patients.
That the Science of natural target pruning has entered our worlds it is not for us to arm ourselves with half a theory and begin to remove limbs of trees simply because they occupy air space.
Would it not be more prudent to gather together with our neighbours and collectively landscape than have 10 half trees because I don't want my air space occupied by your crap. Surely we as Arborists have learned our science enough by now to know that in this case the client is not always right. A tree will grow and we all know right tree right place....but a fence is no reason why a tree can not live a happy and succesful life.
My point earlier was that eliminating a fence and using a natural border gave a tree more room to grow, but to remove branches from a tree just because they grow there is not an excuse. I will not practice what a tree does not require. most situations can be illeviated to the benefit of all parties somewhat. But not all people are going to be happy. This is the awareness that we must educate the population with. The tree is too important for us to be maiming and condemning as we see fit. Is our education not showing us more and more that they came before us and they will outlive us. How would we feel if they were able to condemn us all at once because they thought we were unsafe. Which if analysed correctly they certainly would have justification for, because they have harmed nothing yet our decisions threaten their existence...

Sean Freeman

I'm not going to get into a discussion or word throwing game about what is or is not Fascism, however in all the (very) many disputes over fencelines trees and other assorted vegetation, and disputes about root damage, subsidence etc... it seems to me that for about 90% of them the various parties could have settled their problems relatively easily except for the fact that their dispute rapidly turns into something much more about who has power, and who is RIGHT, than anything to do with the physical reality of the supposed problem and the numerous possible options to manage that.

Trees are a renewable resource, sort of obvious but that does not mean that they should be devalued as assets to the community in general, we haven't reached the point where there is general agreement that they are assets, 99% of the engineers I've met don't even think of them as assets at all, they are never given equal standing in concept planning for subdivisions in the civils or even in the lot allocations. The arguement for rational proven long term vegetation management is won on some developments and lost in the next! All levels of government seem only too willing to pay lip service to proper environmental protection..way too many loopholes and exceptions.

Some of the success stories in Arboriculture should get better press...by which I mean press in our mags and journals, next time one of you is at a conference or seminar and the speaker is telling how they did this or that and won over this person or reorganised that local authority..go up to them afterwards and ask them simple direct questions that relate to how it might help in the situations you have to face, get a contact address/number.

For most of the wider community trees and the benefits they provide are somethting they want in their environment, they don't necessarily want exactly what I want or what you want, but without providing them with guidance on how to manage the urban forest for the long term all they'll end up with is mutilated trees, that provide nothing but liabilities...and there we all lose.

TrevMcRev

I laugh when i regularly come across people who want to cut the neighbours tree to fenceline when they have their very own tree inside the fenceline doing exactly the same thing, thats just being petty over ownership, it's like "i pay the mortgage on this property so nothing else is allowed near it unless i say so"

Straight lining a tree to the boundary usually makes a total hack job of it, all in the name of preventing leaf litter or an unfounded fear of failure.

The leaves still blow 100m away anyhow so it achieves nothing really, just satisfies someones petty control issue.

I walk away from people who want quotes to do this. I try to get them to compromise, maybe reduce the length and density of the over hang, but not draw a laser beam at fenceline cut cut cut.

I have neighbours on 1 side with trees over my driveway, i lightly prune them, but no way would i fenceline them and want to look at that everyday. I find leaves from them at the other end of my yard anyway, so what would it achieve?

My other neighb has a beaut euc scoparia in the middle of his back yard and was so concerned about me and the other neighbs he wanted to lop it! So i did some reduction pruning and cable bracing for a slab o crownies just to save it!

Eric Frei

Maybe trees have squatters rights down there?

__________________

Eric Frei

Here's a pic of the old lady, she's giving me a present, 2 hand knitted blankets for the kids, how sweet, she's 84.


I go there about once a year to clean 3 palms in her front yard, she doesn't like the fronds rubbing on the roof or the mess and demands a real thorough clean ... in her words, "sounds like the boogeyman when I sleeping in the night". But she looks after her own palms fine.


And here's the pic of what the scene is like from her side. I put red rings to show the dead cut stuff they chucked back over the neibs fence, the regrowth already on the stubs they hacked and in the background notice the dirty cocos palms along the fence. The neighbour wont clean their cocos palms and as they're so close to the roof and fence rubbish falls all the time. That's responsible isn't it. She has pick up after those palms etc too.

She did ask the neighbours politely to do the right thing but they dont give a shit, so out of her measley pension she has to pay contractors or try to do it herself which she cant.

Attached Thumbnails

     

__________________

Eric Frei

The fence line tree disputes go on.

Now read this case carefully.

Weeks after moving into the house in 2000 the lady tried to prune the neighbours overhanging tree and ...

Now 9 years later she's still an invalid and arguing ... but the doctor neighbour (Dr Robert Austin) is suing her!

So he defends his legal rights suing an invalid pensioner on $250 a week but screw the neighbours rights eh?

Read the whole story.

Tree pruning battle heads to court | General | Coast news | thedaily.com.au

__________________

arthur

we have 7km of fenceline. Due to most having livestock we need to fence the boundaries and due to NSW law we end up with no tree problems just a fence with 6m clearance each side.

Still get problems as each boundary is long and expensive so those without livestock endup being taken to court to pay for their half of the costs or one wants post and rail and the other only want 3 strand wire???

Just try and get money out of the Forestry department when you have 3km of boundary with them!!!!

arthur

__________________

Thomas

I have a similar problem, from the other side.
- My rental property in QLD with 6 pine trees, A Macadamia and an African Tulip. One of the Pines trees is protected. Council OK'd removing others.
- Neighbours have complained over the years about the Pine needles. I paid $900 to trim the trees back for one neighbour. Thought I had solved the problem.
- Now another one is complaining that there are 'danagerous' branches falling (photo) and threatened to sue me and the property manager. The property managers are running scared and want me to personally indemnify them.
- Neighbour is not happy with trimming and wants complete removal. She has refused to split the $4000 cost.
- She has a photo of a branch that landed on her roof but I can't even tell if is from my tree (my house in background). It looks pretty harmless to me. The trees are perfectly healthy looking and all on my land.
- I can't touch the protected one and don't want to remove my Macadamia.
Ideas?

Attached Thumbnails

 

Eric Frei

That looks like deadwood from an African Tulip Tree that I would be very surprised is protected as they are considered weeds now.

It's very common for trees to shed deadwood, especially when branches get shaded out. African Tulips are full of deadwood and messy underneath the canopy in most cases I see, a dead wooding regiment annually would keep it pretty well in check.

African Tulip tree wood is light, the deadwood even lighter. Also as the canopies are busy and messy beneath (when unattended over time) it's likely other stuff might be hung up in the tree. As the deadwood sheds from the tree it gets caught, bounces and slips off other branches etc which slows it's velocity. I would have to say the probability of getting hurt would be extremely remote, more likely that if you were underneath the tree looking up you'd cop bird shit in the eye than a stick coz the parrots love those trees especially now when they're starting to seed.

__________________

Thomas

Hi Ekka,

Thanks so much for your answer. Since I am in the States and my property is on the Gold Coast, I would never have known it was so light.

Its a Norfolk Pine that is protected, not the African Tulip. Would you recommend that I remove the Tulip? It sounds like it could cause root problems as well. Or would deadwooding annually be fine?

Coud you recommend a tree trimmer on the Gold Coast to do the job. About how much should it cost?

Eric Frei

Seems here in Queensland they are starting to finally address the issue.

Govt stops neighbours going off their tree | General | Coast news | thedaily.com.au

__________________

Sean Freeman

Fingers crossed