Families have had another ‘lucky escape’ after another ‘dangerous’ tree fell. It follows calls to remove it. The oak tree, which had already damaged property when a branch knocked down three houses, has now caused even more damage to people’s gardens, reports Berkshire Live. The tree is under protection.

Neighbors requested that the tree be removed in September when the first incident happened. But the tree is subject to a Tree Protection Ordinance (TPO) – an order from a local planning authority to protect specific trees, groups of trees or woodland – which means a request for felling must be approved by the council.

Shocking images now show the latest devastation caused by the fallen tree that fell in the strong winds of Storm Claudio on Tuesday (November 2). Furious Debbie Smith, who is at the end of her garden in Hungerford Close, Sandhurst, stressed how “incredibly lucky” it was that the tree did not hurt anyone in the two incidents and slammed Bracknell Forest Council, “for not being helpful be to begin with”. . .

Before Tuesday’s incident, local residents claimed the tree officer told them they would not support the application unless more evidence was provided. Stephen Chown, head of the council’s natural assets department, said the original application submitted to the council contained “incomplete information”. He said that “in the absence of evidence to support tree removal,” the official can only recommend severe crown reduction based on his visual inspection.



The final devastation caused by the tree

After September’s destruction, residents of all three houses had to move temporarily while repairs were carried out. Jodie and Conor, who only moved back into their home last Thursday (October 27) after extensive restoration work, now have to repair the damage to their garden and rebuild the destroyed fences.

They said: “Both times it could have killed someone, the footpath which many families use with their children was completely hit. Bracknell Forest Council has been grossly negligent and failed to do its due diligence.” Ms Smith wants the council to admit it made an “investigative error” and questions whether there are “other dangerous trees” on the council that the Council ” ignore” “.

She added: “We have not received an apology from either of them and feel that if they had worked with us instead of against us, we could have stopped the tree from breaking in two.” Ms Smith felt the officer had ignored previous reports that the tree was dangerous and felt “bullied” into paying a further £400 for another tree. Mr Chown said she was told a new report was needed.

Mr Chown said the arrival of the report was “not in time to authorize tree removal or crown reduction”, which would likely have prevented the collapse. “This second report provided an accurate assessment of the condition of the tree, showing that tree removal can be justified as a necessary action and should be completed in the coming months,” he added.



The damage the tree did last time

A Council Tree officer visited the property on Tuesday following the latest incident, but Jodie and Conor accused them of being “rude and condescending” and offering “no apologies or empathy” to those affected. They said: “He finally agreed that everything should be done and authorized the felling. [It’s] just a shame we had to go through it all twice before we agreed!”

Mr Chown said the council had “welcomed requests to trim or remove this tree” in the years before the collapse and confirmed the officer’s recommendation to remove the tree would be formally issued on November 3.