Fallen trees| negligence vs Act of God

supportmallone

You ask what needs to done. We don't know exactly but what we do know is that it is not right that every govt authority that was and is required to do something says to her "take legal action against the Council".

It is also not right that the NSW Ombudsman investigation into this Council and the many issues relating to it did find that the Council had failed her and also the unit owners but then simply recommends that the Council issue a disingenuous apology to her and her family for the hell they had gone through.

An apology that the woman received that was word for word what the Ombudsman had written.

Where does an 83 yo old pensioner that has been a widow for 30 years find the money to risk taking a Council and its insurer to court. If it wasn't for her three children who funded her legal defence against the unit owners who refused to listen to her - she would be on the street.

Please don't read into that last paragraph that she needs money. This issue is not being written for a call on assistance by way money.

If a Council imposes conditions and irresponsible conditions on people then it needs to be held directly accountable rather than simply having an opinion of we can be negligent and when that negligence becomes an issue then we will only acknowledge that negligence if someone can afford legal action against us.

This Council directed stormwater into this woman's property for decades causing landslides, cliff collapses and tree collapses. When it finally addressed that when the woman had simply had enough of the damage occurring - Council simply redirected it to another area of the cliff and with that negligence it also refused her permission to direct her stormwater away from the cliff and into the street. And then for decade after decade they refused her, unit owners and other property owners to remove the trees from the cliff. One document in the woman's hands states "Council does not believe there is a problem with the roots of the trees"!!!!!!

Massive slabs of sandstone are being prised of the cliff collapsing into backyard of the units fully accessible to adults and children and the apartment block erected just 1-2 metres from the base of a near vertical 25 metre cliff and Council now says we apologise, we have no skills in this area so if you want to be compensated for the damage you need to risk everything and take us to court.

Premier Morris Iemma and the then local minister for govt - did nothing.
The next Premier, Nathan Rees and the then local minister for govt - did nothing.
The next Premier, Kristina Kenneally and the current local minister for govt - are doing nothing.

Mrs Mallone's local member (Canterbury MP Linda Burney) fell for the lies of the General Manager of Council and did nothing. Lies such as unit owners had been endeavouring for years to come to an agreement with Mrs Mallone when the facts were: the geotechnical engineers reports and the unacceptable risk declared by them had been referred to the Council by the unit owners a FULL two years before the unit owners advised Mrs Mallone of the report. It was Council and not Mrs Mallone that they had been endeavouring to come to an agreement with. It was when that failed, that unit owners then informed Mrs Mallone of the geotechnical report and there and then demanded Mrs Mallone accept responsibility to fund major expensive works that unit owners had already scheduled to occur to her land without any knowledge or input from her.

So, we don't know what help she needs but she cannot be left with this massive debt simply because of govt authorities refusing to perform their duties with the due diligence expected of them.

The geotechnical engineers have clearly stated the principal cause of deterioriation to the cliff was the trees - especially the fig trees. Just 50 metres away from Mrs Mallone's cliff area is an area owned by the Council. In 1999/2000 the Council removed trees and performed cliff stabilisation works. Yet at that sametime they refused Mrs Mallone and the unit owners permission to remove them. It was in mid 2003 that a major collapse occurred from Mrs Mallone's cliff (without her knowledge) and that unit owners then called in the geotechnical engineers who as stated above, declared the whole cliff area a unacceptable risk. The report was provided to Council yet this incompetent Council continued to refuse unit owners permission to remove the trees! TWO YEARS later they inform Mrs Mallone and make demands.

And let us not omit......Mrs Mallone's husband fought this Council vigorously opposing Council approving a builind to be erected just 1-2 metres from the base of this massive dangerous cliff. They consoled him by stating it is not his responsibility. The same consolation Mrs Mallone received from Council in early 2006 when Unit Owners threatened her with legal action and Council stated to Mrs Mallone's face "do not worry it is not your responsibility, Mrs Mallone" and to her family "Unit Owners are going after the easiest target".

A disgrace.

supportmallone

By the way - all trees were lopped from the entire cliff area directly behind the unit building in 2008 when unit owners were forced to as a result of the supreme court action they took against Mrs Mallone.

BUT

two years on those same trees are growing profusely. Some of them (especially one massive fig tree) having had the majority of their roots cut through. This is one example


That is exactly how it was left two years ago and as stated above, it has been growing profusely over the last two years.

The geotechnical expert of the unit owners at completion of the works, stated leaving this above an area were children play is acceptable.

There are more photos of this tree here Picasa Web Albums - SupportMallone - 2008 08 03 Em...

and more photos of the cliff area and damage done here in certain albums located here Picasa Web Albums - SupportMallone

Eric Frei

Crikey, these two pictures show it all. You need to get ACA (a current affair) story on this.

Attached Thumbnails

   

__________________

supportmallone

It's been in the front page of the local paper twice. It's been in the Daily Tele.

Unfortunately all refuse to provide the public with the exact reasons (reported by the geotechnical engineers) of the collapses and why the Supreme Court action occurred. All of which are the result of Council failures.

The Daily Tele even published it incorrectly stating Mrs Mallone took legal action.

This is a Council in secure Labor electorate that failed to address their negligence. The Mayor is a Labor MP and he failed to address it. Mrs Mallone's Canterbury MP is Labor and she failed to address it. The NSW Labor Local Minister of Govt Minister failed to address it. The NSW Labor Premier failed to address it.

Politics and bureacratic dishonest responses is affecting the publicity. All local neighbouring property support is hampered because when Mrs Mallone's son began demanding answers from Council - Council began intimidating her and threatening her with having to perform works that the Supreme Court had basically just exhonerated her with. Council has only just now admitted that its threats to issue Orders to Mrs Mallone to conduct expensive drainage works over the last three years will not be continuing and were unsubstantiated.

There are another dozen or so neighbouring properties that are having these cliff instabilities issues occurring but they are frightened that if they speak up or get involved, the Council may enforce them to remove the trees and address the damage done to the cliff. Which would be acceptable if, they had not been refused permission to remove them by Council over the last decades.

People just don't have the money to address this nor fight a Council that doesn't care about the wastage of ratepayers money.

Your comment Ekka and ability to submit the photos on this forum is very much appreciated. We, like you, find that having a 83yo pensioner left with a debt now reaching $260,000 and the cliff still a danger to people is as you stated - says it all.

supportmallone

Mrs Mallone has a Deed of Agreement entered into whereby unit owners (the strata plan) have indemnified her and all future owners of her property. Mrs Mallone and her family would never allow some other innocent person to have to go through what they did because of the mess Canterbury Council created.

The unit owners demanded the works performed were done in the manner they chose - so they must and have taken full responsibility for that.

Mrs Mallones GREENS Councillor states "You have had issues, and I know others have had issues with the Council and its Officers, and in the future there will be other residents who have issue with Council. Council cannot always get things a hundred percent right and cannot satisfy every resident's every need or want."

More than a disgrace.

Iustinian

We see this stuff frequently -- it seems like in our area (Des Moines, IA) that the letigious lingo incorporates the phrase "persons of ordinary intelligence" and whether or not a "person of ordinary intelligence" is capable of determining (at that level) whether or not the suspect tree is hazardous....pretty sketchy.

However, I have seen instances, one in particular comes to mind, in which a woman purchased a home, and was, years later, served with a notice that she had a hazardous tree (no kidding, the neighbor was a lawyer). A HUGE cottonwood with multiple leads and cracks that we could see through 30 ft. high while standing on the ground. A competing tree service was awarded this job with their bid of $14,000/removal -- over 40 hours of labor. The lady had to re-finance her home to fund the project.

We do hazard tree assessments ocassionally, and, DEFINITELY, amid the feuds of grouchy (and resentful) neighbors. When I'm meeting with clients about this type of situation, I always throw out the phrase "depending on how much of a good neighbor you want to be...." haha; I have seen some neighbors pay their neighbor's deductible as a gesture, and, in other cases, split the cost of the removal of a neighbor's dead tree just to avoid fighting, and catastrophe -- which to me is part of the bottom line -- your client's peace of mind