No, it doesn't sound right but the same thing happened to my SO. He had had that insurance company for some years as did his parents, from whom he bought the house after they passed. Same scenario - neighbor's tree fell on his back screened in porch and part of the house roof. My SO had to turn it into HIS (SO's) insurance company and afterwards they canceled his policy! He was like, "Whaaaaat??" I don't remember how much he or his insurance paid on the claim.

This is where one sues the neighbor for the deductible. But that would cost 10xs over. Insurance claims are what they are,not beating that. But the neighbor ought to step up and take ownership.

I "was" a claims adjuster for AAA/California. That is true!

If it's live wood the owner of the tree is NOT liable/responsible for damage done by the tree. "IF" it were dead wood then the trees owner should have taken the dead wood down before an accident happened...that's negligence.

Do I like this rule....NO. Your tree...your mess...YOU clean it up "and" pay for it....but that's not how it's written.

Thanks for the info though I don't follow the logic. A few months before a limb from this same tree fell on their car's front windshield causing it to be replaced as well as popping out a little ding in the surrounding metal.

Can you trim a neighbor's tree overhanging your property without consulting the neighbor?

"Can you trim a neighbor's tree overhanging your property without consulting the neighbor?"

Yes! You own the "air space". But by trimming, I just mean branches. Cutting the trunk up might kill it. "Killing" a neighbors tree....get written permission first.

I came home from work one day and saw a large branch from my maple tree had crashed on my neighbor's garage roof, doing substantial damage. I immediately called my insurance agent to report it and they told me not to worry. "If your tree falls on his house, his insurance covers it. If his tree falls on your house, we cover it." That, apparently, is how it works in the insurance world. Who knew?

I did immediately hire a certified arborist to examine and prune my maple tree. He shrugged and said "Trees are living things. It happens."

If they can prove there was a sickness, weakness, breaks or dead wood and rot then it would be the responsibility of the tree owners. If it was a perfectly healthy fine tree and it was an act of God it would be the responsibility of the property owner who had the damage. However it is expected that the owner of the tree keeps the tree trimmed to protect the property of both parties. You cannot force them to trim the tree from your property you can ask for it to be trimmed. You can't just cut on their tree. Small branches might be ok. Now since you mentioned that a limb had previously fallen from this tree that may help you prove it was not a healthy tree.

The decent thing would be to split the cost.

jrb451

You can trim a limb hanging over your property and you can pick any fruit, in my state.

This is where one sues the neighbor for the deductible.

Unless the tree was dead or diseased, the neighbor is not liable. Not for the damage, not for the deductible.

If your tree falls on your property and doesn't do any other damage the insurance company won't cover the cost of removing the tree. If it does physical damage they'll pay.

The tree that fell was Pecan. The neighbor whose tree it was asked my neighbor for half of the wood after the tree service cut it up.

Yes, something I learned in 2007 when my neighbors pine landed on my house taking out my chimney, damaging a portion of newly replaced cedar roof, and gutter. It was not her problem, but mine. Had I ever expressed concerns about the tree, preferably in writing, it might have ended differently...but I couldn't truthfully say I had concerns, that tree had been there longer than I'd been alive and I hadn't given it thought.

My insurance paid for the mason, roofer, a boom truck to lift the tree from the house. I was not covered for damage to the gardens or landscaping. TG for friends because it took a lot of muscle and a second smaller boom truck (no fee) to lift what was left of the tree once the house was 'secure'. The city sent a crew to take the very last of the debris, no charge....it was two 10' sections of log.

I might have felt better about the whole experience if the neighbor had at some point apologized for the damage, or at least expressed interest in how things had turned out...but she never did. It was the 'elephant' in the room, or on the block.

My homeowners premium did go up the following year after a claim totaling about $12,000. I have no way of knowing for sure if due to the claim.

The second property owner had no choice in whether his neighbour had a tree, what kind it was, where located or how well he cared for it (and, as I understand it, he can trim branches hanging into his yard).

It seems to me that when the neighbour's tree causes damage on the adjacent neighbour's property it should be the responsibility of the owner of the tree, and his insurance company, to deal with damage that the falling of the tree causes on another person's property.

(Looks like God gets blamed for a lotta stuff!)

ole joyful

It seems to me that when the neighbour's tree causes damage on the adjacent neighbour's property it's the responsibility of the owner of the tree, and his insurance company, to deal with damage that the falling of the tree causes on another person's property.

But that is not the way it works. I believe I heard that the reason for this 'tree law' was a decision that since trees are so important and beneficial in many ways, that one should not be afraid of financial disaster because one has a tree (as long as it is well cared for, healthy, and alive).

So, to recap: neighbor's Pecan tree falls in friend's yard smashing the corner of his garage and through a wood fence. Friend's HO policy covers and friend pay's $1,000 deductible. Two months earlier, limb from same tree fell on friend's car causing windshield replacement and minor body repair. Friend pays deductible for this. Neighbor asks for one half the wood from the fallen Pecan tree.

Your friend may have a different outcome if the tree was actually diseased, but some healthy trees drop more limbs than others. Perhaps your friend could call an arborist re an opinion on disease.

In my state you can also trim any tree that grows over into your property. I occasionally have pomegranates fall into my yard.

I've seen cases like this in People's Court, and the judge always says that when a healthy tree falls onto a neighbor's property, it is an "act of god". I am perfectly fine with that ruling.

We had a neighbor tree that was dead and in danger of falling where we park our truck, so we sent them a certified letter notifying them and cc'd our insurance company. The neighbor had the tree removed. But had they not had it removed and it fell and did damage, they would've been responsible as they were notified of the hazardous condition.

A tree on our neighbor's property was sickly and some branches were dead -- big branches. She lives out of state -- the home was a rental and I would write her monthly reminding her about the tree and at least trim the branches. Reminding her that because it was mostly dead if anything happened it would be here dime, not mine. I was told that sending her those notices would help my case in case anything happened to those limbs and caused damage on our property. I know she didn't have a lot of money but we never parked near that tree (it was next to our drive) because one of those branches would surely cause great damage to the car! She finally got the worst of the limbs taken down. The tree is still up and it has those "mushroom" like things which indicate that the tree is dead from the inside out. I hope if it ever falls it's from a south or west wind which would place it in her yard and on her house!

Martha -- I had a similar situation, with a neighbor's diseased tree and a cheap, absentee landlord. Fortunately, my arborist was willing to write a statement that the tree was diseased and in danger of falling. I forwarded the letter, a detailed description and pictures to the owners via their property manager. The tree was quickly removed, I believe at the insistence of the property manager. I offered to help cover the cost since the tree was leaning heavily into my yard and I wanted it gone but they didn't take me up on it.

It's not covered under windstorm coverage?

blfenton...wind doesn't change the greenwood vs deadwood rule.

It does cover a fence that blows down...or shed that blows away & damages another persons property, even if the shed wasn't anchored properly or was rotted & structurally unsound. Note: a shed is considered an "out" building & is covered for damage.

If the tree was healthy and there was no expectation of it falling, and the only reason it fell was because a random lightning bolt hit it, I think it would be unfair to expect the owner to be responsible.

Otherwise the only way a homeowner could avoid the potential for paying for such accidents would be to have no trees at all, and who would want to live in a neighbourhood with no trees?

I am a bit baffled by the homeowners I am reading about here. We have 5 acres and none of my trees would be able to fall on a neighbor’s home, but there is no way I wouldn’t pay their deductible if one did. Some of our trees hang over to their property (so do theirs on ours), but we make sure dead branches are trimmed right away. A couple of years ago, a branch killed two of her tomato plants in a bad storm. She didn’t complain, but I went out right away to get her new ones. Peanuts compared to a roof, but my trees are my responsibility.

I agree Iris. I would at least offer to split the deductible.

Law does not always follow decent principles. Unfortunate at times.

I'm not sure all of you catch the thinking involved behind the approaches that have been explained.

Try this- your neighbor has a healthy, properly trimmed tree 50 feet from the property line. It receives a lightening strike and catches fire. The storm's wind blows burning embers onto your roof. It catches fire and $5000 in damage results. Your home insurance has a $500 deductible. Neighbor has a $50K personal liability policy. Who should pay what and why?

I always laugh at the "act of god" classification the insurance companies use to get out of paying. If you believe in god, isn't everything an act of god?

I think they should say "act of Mother Nature" instead of act of god. I consider both to be equally mythical characters. Different religions have different gods anyway.

At work, a tree limb fell down during a storm in the parking lot and crashed into the production manager's car, destroying his windshield. The tree was otherwise healthy, and the owner of the property refused to compensate him for the damage, as the insurance companies considered it an act of god. This manager parked in the spot where I used to park, but a week earlier, he had decided that he wanted to park where I did and issued parking assignments and took my spot and moved me one spot over. My car received no damage, and so I was grateful that he had forced me out of my favorite spot.

Years ago a very large oak tree with two large trunks split in half at the very base during a hurricane and one half fell into the pasture, and the other half fell into our back yard. The estimate from two different tree companies to cut up and remove both halves was ~$4000. Because the half of the tree that fell in our backyard hit the three-board fence around our pasture destroying one board and merely knocking down two others, the clean-up of the entire tree was covered, even though the materials cost of the property damage caused by the tree was perhaps $10. IIRC there was also ~$1000 damage to the house caused by the hurricane. We had a $1000 deductible, so if the tree hadn't caused property damage we'd have received nothing. Instead we had a veritable $4000 windfall <--- see what I did there.

Lars, that wasn't "act of Mother Nature". It was Karma!

Here's the thing - it would be unreasonable to hold an individual (or business) responsible for damages caused by an act of nature (a better term to replace the old and probably archaic phrase "act of god") if the individual had acted responsibly and not negligently in other respects. Stuff happens that can't be prevented and would be unreasonable to plan for. Insurance companies can offer policies to provide protection from such happenings because they pool risks but to hold an individual liable would be unreasonable.

Jrb, I thought it was Karma also - and I do believe in that! Nobody liked that production manager anyway, and he had been there for only a year. He had worked for Ralph Lauren before and considered himself a designer, but when he "designed" a new console for our company, I discovered (after it was already in production) that it was an exact copy of a Jean Michel Frank design and told my boss to take his name off the design, since it was stolen. He also had never registered his car in California and kept Michigan license plates, in violation of California law.

I was in charge of product development and tried to make sure that any new designs that my boss and I did were not copies of anyone else's designs. My boss would never give me credit for my own original designs (despite saying she would) and would put her name on them instead - even on the patents, which is actually illegal.

My boss started her furniture career working for Karl Springer, but some of her designs looked very much like Milo Baughman, and I would let her know if anything she designed had already been produced, if I could prove it. She would not produce much of what I designed myself, even though it was original and the sales staff liked the designs and said they could easily sell them.

Life sure sounds tough for some. lol

"At work, a tree limb fell down during a storm in the parking lot and
crashed into the production manager's car, destroying his windshield."

You do realize that a tree or limb falling on your own property that causes damage on that property is different than said tree or limb falling on adjacent property and causing damage to that adjacent lot's property?

Seems not!

I had a huge oak tree in my backyard that lost a branch - the branch was literally the size of a tree itself. It happened about 5 am on a beautiful summer morning, no wind, no storm. The tree had showed no sign of a problem. The branch fell on my house and fortunately one of the branches on it stuck into the ground otherwise it might've crashed through my roof and into my daughter's room. The walls in her room actually cracked.

The whole thing caused about $40k in damages... a crane was brought in to lift the tree off the house. Insurance covered that - but refused to pay to have the rest of the tree removed. I was scared to death it would fall the other way - onto a school's backyard. I had to pay to have it taken down.

I sent a registered letter to my neighbor's whose very large sugar maple leans part way over my yard and expensive fence. They've not had it trimmed in 15 years. If something happens, I want it documented that they haven't taken care of the tree.

Will that work?

Let's suppose it rains upstream and flooding occurs downstream, should the owners where it rained pay damages downstream? They should have known it might rain!

"Leans" or grows over? There is a difference. And lack of pruning or 'trimming' as you call it may not be an indication that the tree is not cared for or properly healthy......it may just mean that it has not been necessary. Pruning a mature tree is not an annual requirement. In fact, it may not even be necessary at all.

F.M. I suspect you stirred up a hornet's nest there. You are the one who is responsible for trimming the part of that tree which leans into your yard if you deem it necessary, and may do so as long as your trimming does not kill the tree. A leaning tree is not necessarily a danger, either. If there are branches over your house, go ahead if you wish and hire an arborist (at your expense) to trim them, though.

If you do not trim any worrisome branches and the letter turns up after 'something happens' and your home is damaged, your insurance company may possibly deny payment saying that you did not mitigate the danger by not having the tree trimmed of branches overhanging your home, as was your responsibility, for 15 years.

"If they can prove there was a sickness, weakness, breaks or dead wood
and rot then it would be the responsibility of the tree owners."

This. I have, in winter, photographed from multiple angles, a tree in my neighbor's yard to document that it has been extensively cabled. At least 3 cables that I can see. The local hayseed landscaper is telling this guy "I got this, man", as though the tree can be kept up indefinitely, when it really ought to be cut down. The landscaper just knows that if it falls one way (hopefully) and takes out this idiots deck, he's going to have an 'emergency call' on his hands $$$$. (I already had a run in with the guy, btw. Greedy bastard. I used someone else for my tree work) If it falls the other way and crushes a wing of my house? I will submit to my insurance company the pictures proving it was a weak tree that any responsible arborist would have removed. (The idiot local landscaper is MD licensed of course, but I don't believe he is a formally licensed arborist)

A warning to the 0.0000001% of people who consider moving to a rural area to have a large 'country garden' as I did. Be careful which neighbors you 'choose' by your lot selection. Sorry to put it so bluntly but most Americans are f---ing inconsiderate morons when it comes to managing their own gardens. We just don't have an established tradition of thoughtful horticulture as they do in Europe or the Commonwealth. Not to say there are not problems, but I drove thru plenty of country towns in rural AU and NZ without seeing the nonsense you see in the US. So the biggest thorn in my side is dealing with idiots like the guy above, or another newer set of neighbors. Who, for example, just planted a ton of rose of sharons along the property line, when these are INCREDIBLY weedy here. They have been banned by some states along the eastern seaboard and ought to be banned by Maryland. *btw this something truly admirable about AU. As I think I posted in my trip report, they take invasive control terribly seriously, and even in a brief trip I saw two instances of spraying for non-natives*

So in retrospect I might have been better off on a slightly larger lot, outside of a neighborhood, maybe one of those lots surrounded by farmland. Farmers actually have to be somewhat intelligent about how they manage their land. They can't let a bunch of hideous rose of sharon invade their crop because "they done look purdy".

The same thing happened to me during a straight line wind, part of the neighbors tree fell on my garage, I had just finished paying for a new roof on it. I had to run it thru my insurance and then my rates went up after that. What really took some nerve is the neighbor asked if I would pay half for cutting down that tree since it had grown a few inchs into the chain link fence line on my property. I had just moved in so that didn't go down too well.

That's how insurance works whether you think it's right or not. If it was obvious the tree was dead or diseased then the neighbor would be liable. If the tree looked fine then it's considered an act of god/nature.

There was a tree right over our property line that leaned toward our garage that was dead and if it fell it would take out our garage. The property it was on was a lot that was for sale. We contacted the developer and let him know the tree was dead and needed to be taken down or it would end up on our garage. We saved all communications with the developer just in case it wasn't taken care of and fell. The developer did come and take the tree down.

It seems unfair but truthfully, limbs that overhang your property are indeed up to you to take care of to the extent that they are over your property. There are some people who would object vigorously to a reverse scenario like a neighbor trimming back the part of his tree that overhangs their own property and shades their patio!

In fact I have an arborist coming out next week to remove dead limbs and trim back others that overhang my yard and close to the house, but the trees are actually in my neighbor's yard. I benefit from their shade, fortunately can afford the cost, and take responsibility for keeping my own property safe from damage.

I would offer to pay a part of the deductible myself, but not all of it, for the OP's scenario, just to be neighborly, but wouldn't feel obliged to; and also would have offered to sell that neighbor the pecan wood (since I had to pay for its removal!) for what I could get from a woodworker for it.

He gets off Scot free? Not quite. The guy with the fallen tree in his yard gets to cut it up for firewood and return all the trimmings back to the yard from whence it came!

Huh?