Ealing North
| |
|
Steve Pound MP Ealing North |
|
|
HIGH HEDGES BILLPrivate Members Bill Briefing Key facts • In 1999, it was estimated that 17,000 people had problems with neighbouring high garden hedges. • Attention focussed on Leyland cypress, a cross between Nootka cypress and Monterey cypress that occurred naturally on the Leighton estate of C J Leyland in mid-Wales in 1888. • It grows at a rate of 1 metre a year - more than any other hedging plant. • But Leyland cypress is not the only culprit. Any hedge can get too big if it’s not properly maintained and can cause misery by obstructing daylight and sunlight, blocking views and dominating small gardens. • If people cannot resolve these problems amicably, there is nothing anyone can do - at present - to force the owner to reduce the height of their hedge. • 9 out of 10 people who responded to a Government consultation said that new laws were needed. The Government has welcomed Stephen Pound and Baroness Gardner’s initiatives. How the Bills would work • Complaining to the local authority would be a last resort. People should have tried to solve their hedge problems by negotiation with their neighbours before approaching the authority. Otherwise their complaint could be rejected. • If someone could not settle their hedge dispute amicably, they would be able to take their complaint to their local authority provided that: - the hedge in question comprised wholly or predominantly of a line of two or more evergreen or semi-evergreen trees or shrubs; - it was over 2 metres high; - the hedge acted, to some degree, as a barrier to light or access; and - because of its height, it was adversely affecting the complainant’s reasonable enjoyment of their domestic property (that is, their home or garden). • The local authority would be able to charge a fee, to be paid by the complainant. • In each case, the local authority would decide, in the first place, whether the height of the hedge was adversely affecting the complainant’s reasonable enjoyment of their property. If so, the authority would then consider what, if any, action should be taken in relation to the hedge in order to remedy the adverse effect and to prevent it recurring. • In reaching their decision, the local authority would take into account all relevant factors, including the views of the hedge owner and the impact of the hedge on the wider amenity of the area. • If the local authority decided that action should be taken to remedy the complaint, they would issue a formal notice setting out what must be done and by when. This could well include long-term maintenance of the hedge at a lower height, but could not involve reducing the height of the hedge below 2 metres, or its removal. • This would be known as a ‘remedial notice’. It would be binding not only on whoever was the owner or occupier of the land where the hedge was situated at the time the notice was issued, but also on their successors. • Both hedge owners and complainants would have rights of appeal against the local authority’s decision. • Failure to comply with a remedial notice would be an offence liable, on conviction in the magistrates' court, to a level 3 fine (up to £1,000). The court might then - in addition to, or in place of, a fine - issue an order for the offender to carry out the required work within a set period of time. There would be a further offence of failure to comply with the court order, liable to a level 3 fine. At this point, the court would also be able to set a daily fine of up to one twentieth of a level 3 fine for every day that the work remained outstanding thereafter. • The local authority would also have default powers to go in and do the work itself, recovering its costs from the hedge owner. The authority would be able to use these powers whether or not the criminal offence was pursued. Territorial coverage • The Bill would apply to England and Wales only. • The Scottish Executive is committed to legislation in Scotland on this issue, through a Member’s Bill. • Northern Ireland has no plans at present to legislate on high hedge problems. Regulatory impact • The effect of the Bill on businesses, charities and voluntary organisations is expected to be minimal. • The main costs would fall on the local authorities who would administer the complaints system and appeals authority. • It is estimated that it would cost local authorities between £2.8 - £3.2 million to deal with a backlog of some 10,000 existing problem cases, spread over a period of 3 years. Thereafter the caseload should drop dramatically. • These costs would be met, in part at least, through fees paid by complainants. If this does not reflect the full economic cost to authorities of administering this system, resources would be transferred into the revenue support grant settlement to cover the shortfall - under established procedures for dealing with new burdens on local authorities. More about the High Hedges Bill |
|
|
|
| Disclaimer | Copyright | Designed by Bassam Mahfouz. Promoted by Julian Bell, The Labour Party, Ruskin Hall, 16 Church Road, W3 8PP on behalf of Steve Pound MP |
