The tree has been featured today in Peterborough Matters on line magazine . The Peterborough Telegraph on line and a news report on ITV Anglia News.  I think the council will now get the message that there are a lot of people not happy with their decision. When the council gave planning permission for these houses they must have taken the trees into account and surveyed the site. How has things changed? The answer is the council has changed this council take the cheapest option. If the council are liable it is because they failed to correctly survey the site and granted planning permission wrongly.  However if that is the case they can rectify the problem they caused by paying for the house to be repaired with the tree remaining. This will satisfy everyone however it will cost more than the way they want to solve the problem.  Where exactly does the "Environmental capital" (their words) excuse this action?

Next is the company that insures the house when they agreed to insure the house they must have been aware of the tree you have to declare any trees that are near your property when you take out a policy. Now it comes time to pay out they ask the council to pay? The tree is causing no direct damage, no damage to services no damage to drains.

The council's report says the damage is because the soil is clay and shrinks when it is dry and expands when it is wet they feel that the tree takes water from the soil so may exacerbate the soil problem.

The soil hasn't changed since the house was built the tree hasn't changed since the house was built so where is the fault ? Certainly not with the tree! The tree is not even that near the houses! The interesting fact is that it isn't the house nearest the tree that has the settlement it's the one further away! 

This is a farce, lots of houses built in Bretton have settlement because of the clay soil not many have a tree to blame though!  There are other trees much nearer houses than this one but they don't seem to have a problem! 

If PCC are liable it is because the planning department failed to spot a future problem something that won't go away with the removal of the tree.

So lets make the council see sense . They failed  ? They pay, or are the builders liable? They knew the tree was there did they build accordingly? Or are the insurance company liable ? They knew the tree was there when they took the money for the policy. Greedy Humanity fails - Nature pays...  

  Lets ramp this up ! Please email Paul Bristow or phone him or anyone else you think may help. The council must be made to do the right thing rather than the easy cheapest thing. We can show our distain at the next election (as it seems the only things important to the council is money and votes) But the problem is the next council election is four years away. They think people have short memories....

Thanks again to everyone! 

Richard