Upset dad fined for cutting down a protected tree worth £100000 after council refused his requests.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/57822/57822b667b519b0d0a12b19fb3250bceda4541c9" alt="Dad Fined After Cutting Down £100000 Tree Against Council Orders Dad Fined After Cutting Down £100000 Tree Against Council Orders"
This tree was worth over £100,000. The court fined Bellis £1,100 for his actions. He also had to pay a £440 surcharge, and costs of £1,067 were added.
Bellis was charged with damaging the tree on purpose. The council said he broke a tree protection rule. This rule needs permission before changing protected trees, though some work on the trees is allowed.
Bellis wanted to cut down the beech tree outside his home, and he saw it as a risk. He asked the council in April 2024 through a tree expert.
The council said no, and Bellis then cut the tree down to a stump about eight metres high. He now faces a fine for this act.
Bellis had previously asked to remove the tree, stating that it lifted the paving stones near his house, creating a tripping danger. The council did not agree, as they said the tree looked healthy.
Bellis then reported falling branches in April that damaged his car and roof, with one nearly hitting his daughter. The council still refused permission, stating that his concerns did not warrant removing the tree.
Soon after, the council learned the tree work was not permitted. Officers found the tree cut to a stump.
Bellis admitted to cutting the tree in May 2024, using his earlier reasons sent to the council. He was appealing the October 2023 decision at the time.
Cutting down the tree made the appeal pointless. An audit showed that paving issues were not addressed, and the tree’s value was worth more than £114,000.
The tree will not recover from the cutting and its value is now lost forever. The council described the cut tree as an eyesore, stating Bellis took matters into his own hands.
The court ordered Bellis to pay Liverpool Council £1,067. A council person said they support the court’s decision.