Agenda item

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

 

“Relevant Background Information

 

      In December 2009, the Minister for the Department of the Environment (DOE) launched a public consultation seeking views on the draft High Hedges Bill.

 

      In England and Wales, the introduction of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 gave local Councils powers to deal with high hedges, however, there is currently no legislation in Northern Ireland governing the height or maintenance of a hedge.

 

      Disputes between neighbours regarding high hedges are common but there is currently little which can be done under statute to resolve the matter. Problems of this type may have increased in recent years due to greater urban density and also due to the availability of low-cost and often very fast-growing hedges which need to be regularly trimmed to prevent them becoming a nuisance. Currently, the only legal redress a householder can seek regarding a neighbour’s high hedge is through civil action, the costs of which can often be prohibitive.  It is, therefore, appropriate that the Department of the Environment is seeking to address this anomaly through the introduction of High Hedges legislation.

 

      The Department has indicated that responses to the consultation should be received by them by 1st March, 2010.   A draft response is attached.

 

Key Issues

 

·         The Department’s document seeks views on the draft Bill to enable District Councils to deal with nuisance high hedges.

·         The Council welcomes legislation that would assist householders who are adversely affected by high hedges.

·         A high hedge is defined in the Bill as a hedge which must:

 

·         Be formed wholly or predominantly by evergreen or semi-evergreen

·         trees or shrubs;

·         Consist of a line of two or more trees or shrubs;

·         Measure more than 2 metres from ground level (measured on the

·         hedge-owner’s side);

·         Act as a barrier to light or access;

·         Be affecting residential property; and

·         Be growing on land owned by someone other than the person making the complaint

 

·         The Council would have the discretion to charge a fee from the complainant to recover administration and investigation costs and to deter malicious or frivolous complaints.

·         Councils in England and Wales have set fees for processing a complaint averaging between £350 to £650.

·         The complainant must be able to demonstrate that they have attempted to communicate or mediate with the hedge owner in advance of the Council agreeing to take action. In England and Wales complainants have experienced difficulty in obtaining mediation services so care needs to be taken that similar problems don’t arise here.

·         The Department will need to provide District Councils with clear guidance on the evidence required for demonstrating that initial communication and mediation has taken place.

·         The Department would need to resource awareness raising campaigns for the public and guidance on the legislation including advice on planting hedges, maintaining them and ensuring that nesting birds are protected.

·         The Department needs to clarify the issue of liability where a high hedge subsequently dies after it is cut back by order of the Council.

·         The Council would be concerned about carrying out works in default on land where there is no known owner and therefore little or no prospect of recovering costs. An alternative would be to receive some government funding to carry out such work under this new regulation.

 

Resource Implications

 

      The Council will have the discretion to charge a fee for the investigation of a complaint. This will allow the Council to recover its costs in investigating complaints but will also have the effect of deterring frivolous or malicious complaints. Research has shown that similar sized urban Councils in England and Wales would receive on average between 5 and 12 complaints per annum and the fees range between £350 and £650. Some Councils offer reductions for those on benefits. The income from fees would be used to offset any additional staffing or administrative costs incurred.

 

Recommendation

 

      It is recommended that the Committee agrees the attached draft response to the Department’s consultation document on the draft High Hedges Bill.

 

Council Response

 

Introduction

 

      Belfast City Council is aware that there is currently no legislation in Northern Ireland governing the height or maintenance of a hedge and as a result, disputes between neighbours regarding high hedges can remain unresolved for years.  Problems of this type are often referred to the Council but, to date, there was little that could be done if the owner of the hedge was reluctant to address the issue.

 

      It is likely that disputes of this type may have increased due to greater urban density and also due to the availability of low-cost and often very fast-growing hedges which need to be regularly trimmed to prevent them becoming a nuisance.  Currently the only legal redress a householder can seek is through civil action, the costs of which can be prohibitive.

 

      BelfastCity Council therefore welcomes the introduction of a High Hedges Bill by the Department.  The Council does, however, have a number of specific concerns and queries regarding some of the proposals contained within the consultation document and draft Bill.

 

Issues of concern

 

·         The Department will need to provide guidance to District Councils in relation to those circumstances that would constitute a complainant taking all reasonable steps to resolve the matter complained of, including how a complainant would need to demonstrate this.

 

·         Where the property is vacant and there is no traceable owner, the Council is concerned that there is an assumption by the Department that the Council would automatically act in default, without additional resources being made available to it.

 

·         The Department needs to clarify whether or not a mediation service would be available.  This is a service that the Council would call for and one which is available in England and Wales. However it would need to be effectively resourced to ensure that it is readily available to those that need this service. This is currently not always the case in England and Wales.

 

·         Resources will be required to educate and advise the public with regard to the new legislation and on how to plant and maintain hedges in order to avoid a problem.

 

·         The Council would welcome a prescribed application form which would clearly indicate to the complainant what information is required and would capture any previous communication and/or mediation. A standard form would also ensure consistency of approach from Councils across Northern Ireland.

 

·         The Council would welcome clarification on liability regarding hedges on land where there is no known owner.

 

·         The Council would be concerned about the potential for hedge owners cutting hedges during the bird nesting season and would appreciate guidance in relation to this matter.

 

·         The Council would be concerned about the liability implications in the situation where it ordered a hedge owner to reduce the height of a hedge and the hedge subsequently died. It would be helpful if the legislation could limit the potential for such claims in some way, provided that the Council has acted in good faith and has taken appropriate professional advice regarding the proposed remedy.

 

·         Those from lower-socio-economic groups may find the cost of employing a specialist tree surgeon prohibitively expensive if a notice is served on them. Financial assistance may be necessary.

 

·         The Department should consider allowing reduced fees for those on means tested benefit or the elderly.  However Councils would need to receive financial support to cover costs.

 

·         The Council would welcome clarification in relation to Powers of Entry and the requirement to give the occupier of land 24 hours notice and would suggest that this should also apply to the owner of the land.

 

·         The Council would seek clarification on how to deal with complaints relating to land which is vacant or where there is no identifiable occupier.

 

·         The Council would welcome confirmation that the registered charge placed on a property following works in default will include the cost of registering a charge on the property.

 

·         The Council would be concerned about carrying out works in default on premises with no known owners as there would be little prospect of recovering costs. Therefore some funding may be required.”

 

            The Committee approved the draft response.