Bad Advice from surveyor

[kerrylass]

I employed an engineer to draw up plans for my home extension and manage the process with the council. He failed to spot that my neighbour has a 25-30ft specimen tree within one metre of the build and submitted plans noted "no trees within 35m of the build".

We were not aware of implications until the council surveyor arrived to inspect foundations. Has anyone advice on how we can leverage "professional" to contibute to cost of removal and compensation for neighbour who has kindly agreed to fell tree. Retail cost of replacement tree approx =A3400.

[dg]

What has the failure to note the tree got to do with the fact that you would have had to fell the tree or lay the foundations to the satisfaction of the BCO anyway?

Unless you paid for a ground survey, then the BCO always has the last word on foundations and that is unknown at the plan drawing stage.

What he could have done is design some elaborate foundation and then your builder would have added =A310k on the quote.

The trees roots were most likely causing a trespass, so he would have to remove it and not be compensated.

dg

[Don Spumey]

You don't say whether this guy is a member of a professional body such as RICS (

). If he is they will have some method of regulating there members and some method to deal with complaints, claims and Professional Indemnity Insurance.

Don.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Surely its cheaper to dig the foundations deeper? Its not necessarily the architects fault..mine marked on the plans 'strip foundations 1200 deep or as demanded by building control'

Going down 2.2m in one place cost a man hour with a digger (about £15 IIRC) and a lot more concrete..maybe £50 worth..

Just go as deep as the BCO wants you to and leave the trees.

[gort]

Whats a specimen tree ?

Dave

[legin]

Whilst I agree that digging deep may be the answer, within 1m there are no guides within the NHBC book. In fact it states that any thing over

2.5m deep needs specifically designed foundations. On one that I did it meant digging a trial hole so that the engineer could obtain a soil samle to reveal the elasticity of the soil in order to determine the depth of dig. Dependant on whether the tree is low/medium or high water demand will have an impact as will the type of tree and its stated mature height. Also given the fact that if the tree is higher than 50% of its stated mature height then regardless of it is removed or not the footings will have to be designed as if it was still there and may have to be some form of raft foundation. I would also be worried that assuming that the propsed extension will be on the house, how far is the tree from the house and what potential damage could be. It may be that the neighbour has an obligation to remove the tree anyway as other has stated. Legin

[dennis]

Something I would have had a TPO put on when the planning permission was applied for. ;-)

[Lobster]

I think it's one of those redundant words that surveyors love, ie, for "specimen tree" read "tree". I believe it refers to a single tree on its own, rather than (say) one of an apple orchard or hedge etc.

David

[Lobster]

If he had raised the tree issue at the outset, would you really have canned the idea of building an extension altogether? Because if so, then I would suggest you may then have had cause to claim back the cost of his drawing up the plans and of planning permission fees etc. Same if it had emerged that the presence of the tree actually prevented you from going ahead with the project (due to a tree preservation order, unwilling neighbour etc).

However, as you're going ahead, the costs incurred by you in removing said tree are the same as they would have been if he'd flagged it up initially - so I really don't see why you think he should pay you anything at all. I reckon a judge would view it in that light as well, if it ever went to a small claims court.

David

[TheScullster]

"Lobster" wrote

All the above is true. For my part, I think the OP is right to feel miffed though (regardless of compensation sought etc). The fact that "the tree would have to go anyway" doesn't alter the fact that the surveyor/architect has failed in his duties by not bringing the implications of/to said tree to the attention of the OP and building control.

Phil

[The Natural Philosopher]

Thats what happened to me. Its not hugely expensive.

Yup. Diddto in my case.

If it is really close, then digging foundations may well kill it anyway.