A couple who failed to chop down tall hedges which left their neighbours’ garden in darkness were today slapped with a fine in the first court case of its kind in Shropshire.Geoffrey and Lynn Grey, 56, failed to obey a notice ordering them to take action over the leylandii and golden leylandii hedges at their home in Lower Bardley, Stottesdon, near Bridgnorth.
They were ordered to hack down the hedges after their neighbours’ garden was thrown into darkness on most afternoons.
The couple had both earlier admitted failing to take action required by the remedial notices.
Telford magistrates today fined them both £150 for failing to comply with the notices relating to the leylandii and £100 each for a similar charge relating to the golden leylandii.
They were also each ordered to pay £500 costs and a £15 victim surcharge.
Chris Gordon, prosecuting on behalf of Bridgnorth District Council, said he believed it was the first case of its kind in Shropshire.
“I appreciate this is an unusual case,” he said.
He said other cases had been resolved by mediation and neighbours Marion and Robert Hill had gone to the council as a “last resort”.
Mr Gordon said the council had first received a complaint from Mr and Mrs Hill about the hedges in December 2006 and remedial notices, which took effect in August 2007 to take into account the bird nesting season, were issued in June.
He said in February 2007 the leylandii should have been 7m in height but was between 8.5m and 10m while in July this year it was between 7m and 9.5m.
“The effect of this is that in June when I was there the Hills garden has no sunshine cover after about 4.30pm. It’s quite chilly standing there,” he added.
Mr Grey told the court he had intended to reduce the height of both hedges by the end of October last year but with being a full-time carer of his 89-year-old father, who lived 20 miles away, and with the wind and bad weather he had been unable to do this.
The 62-year-old, who told the court he would carry out the work, had then been advised by wildlife experts not to cut the hedges because of nesting birds until this September.
By Lisa Rowley
18 Comments
Didnt it leave their garden in darkness as well??????
Sun does move in the sky,you know!
As i have wrote in this paper in the past people who allow these type of trees to get out of hand deserve all they get i wonder why this couple had to be taken to court??? i bet it was becouse they wouldnt trim the trees , my advise was to just go around and cut them down nobody would make my life a misery and spoil my garden through idleness and ignorance
Sun “moves in the sky” ..?????
I thought that the sun was the centre of the solar system, and the earth “rotated” about its axis (tilted at 23.5 Degrees) once a day (24 Hrs approx) as it orbited around the sun taking 365.25 days (approx), thus creating the seasons, and the day /night, thus allowing the said trees to cast a shadow upon the afflicted neighbours garden of varying degrees about the day, and time of year.
That being so, being that the neighbours garden is “wrong” side of the trees (i.e in a northerly direction), then they are in shadow, whilst the “offending” owners of the trees bask in relatively unobstructed sunlight… (i.e Not in darkness)
And so it is quite right that they should be made cut them down !
A problem of astronomical dimensions?
Or just a VERY big Sundial?
I bet the neighbours will now complain of loss of privacy! You never know what you’ve got ’till it’s gone.
if the council still allowed unlimited garden waste collections then we wouldnt have to have this problem would we!
hear hear jonny 5, its not their fault the taxpayer wont pay for their hedge to be removed hey?????????????
Let’s hope they don’t overfill their green wheelie bin too with the clippings and end up with a fine from the recycling police
Quote “a £15 victim surcharge”
How is this fair. the trees were probably to stop nosey neigbours in the first place!!
i hope my runner beans won’t cause offence, well i am hedging my bets
good i hope they learn to do what they are told in future
the leylandi hedge or tree can be quite dangerous, if planted within 8 feet of a house, as they have very long roots which can undermine the house and cause subsidence, not cheap to repair. i would not have a leylandi cypressis anywhere near my property, and if that upsets the neighbours tough. i used to deal with household insurance claims and hedge boundary disputes cause more friction between neighbours than anything else
I was always told that for every metre of height you had 1-1.5m of root, goodiness knows what the neighbours foundations are like, and will they pick up the tab for repairs/rectifications?
big brother another labour law which david cameron will thankfully rid us of soon
a good law though whatever your political opinion jonty, you wouldnt like it in your back yard
course he will jonty - straight after he repeals the hunting with hounds act haha right
should just chop it down themselves then send him the bill
just trying to relate diddy david cameron to leylandi hedges, i don’t think he has strong roots