Legalised robbery - General Discussion Discussion

[–] Furienna (3377) 5 years ago

It sounds a bit weird that you should need a permission to take care of your own property, and that a permission slip to do it should cost that much. Is it impossible for you to trim the tree yourself and save some money?

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (39865) 5 years ago

Unfortunately, it's hundreds of years old and is protected by the Government. As it's much taller than my house, I need to employ an arborist to do the job and they will only undertake the job if I have obtained the relevant permissions.

reply

[–] Furienna (3377) 5 years ago

I see. But that still doesn't explain why the permission slip has to be so expensive.

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (39865) 5 years ago

Because it’s a really easy way for the local Government to make money for nothing.

reply

[–] kuku (3510) 5 years ago

It's a tax on property, dressed as an environmental license.

That's common in many countries. You create lots of small taxes belonging to completely different sides of bureaucracy (this case, it's not even a tax, but a license fee). That way, you can sell the public that you're only taxing 100, when you're really taxing more once you add all those fees.

I hate it, not only because it overcomplicates and hides taxes, but because they often prey on easy targets and their own complexity leads to create harmful incentives. That case, for example, you're taxing the people that take care of environment, and what you incentive is neglecting it.

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (15124) 5 years ago

And you wonder by nobody sensible takes environmentalists seriously. It's all a cash grab to them.

reply

[–] chilone (18333) 5 years ago

Bingo!!

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

It has struck me that all their policies result in higher prices and less jobs.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I don't know though, is this an environmentalist decision Andy? Here in Australia these sorts of decisions are governed by local councils and protection orders are not just for tress but also heritage listed buildings etc. Which certainly doesn't make a cash grab like this any less annoying.

When my mum built her current house the council told her she had to have a certain number of each type of plant in her garden. More than that, she had to pay a $10000 bond which wasn't returned until the council inspectors checked off that she had planted the right species and amount of plants, a whole year after she had moved in! The crazy thing is that after the inspection she was free to rip it all out and start again if she wanted, which to me makes the original rule redundant. Pointless council bureaucracy.

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (15124) 5 years ago

Since when is it a government's job the micromanage what people do with their gardens? I thought they had real jobs, like passing laws, dealing in trade, diplomacy, and making sure the infrastructure was doing well. What the hell are they doing sticking their noses into people's private gardens for?

It's no wonder their electrical grids and wildfire management sucks. They're too busy dictating people's private lives to do their real jobs!

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I know, it's madness.

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (39865) 5 years ago

It’s not the preservation order that I have a problem with, as it’s a beautiful, huge, old oak tree, full of history. In order to keep it healthy though, all the deadwood needs to be trimmed annually. My objection is having to fork out £160 per year, just to get a piece of paper that allows me to help keep this fine specimen alive and well.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Rightly so too, I think a one-off charge for a permit that lasts for your entire occupancy would be fairer and make more sense.

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (39865) 5 years ago

It’s money for old rope though isn’t it.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Not sure how attached you are to the tree but have you considered trying to poison it?

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (39865) 5 years ago

No, I’m not going to kill this beautiful tree. It hasn’t done anything wrong.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Fair enough, wasn't sure how you felt about it and whether you would prefer it be gone altogether.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I want to build a bigger garage but the city won't approve it because it's 5 inches too close to the sidewalk. I have given up.

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (39865) 5 years ago

I guess the guy that’s employed to hold the tape measure has to be seen to be doing something, eh?

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Exactly - I have applied three times and it's the same guy who rejects it.

reply

[–] BillySlater (4285) 5 years ago

How ridiculous! If government wants to preserve something, they should be footing the bill.

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (39865) 5 years ago

It’s not the preservation order that I have a problem with, as it’s a beautiful, huge, old oak tree, full of history. In order to keep it healthy though, all the deadwood needs to be trimmed annually. My objection is having to fork out £160 per year, just to get a piece of paper that allows me to help keep this fine specimen alive and well (the labour is in addition to that).

reply

[–] ShogunofYonkers (78608) 5 years ago

Absurd!
$200 bucks a year is a screwing

you should alert the media, see if they'd send out a van to interview you, I'd bet a lot of people in your community feel the same way and this could start a movement

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (39865) 5 years ago

Unfortunately, it wouldn't garner a lot of interest because a lot of people would view it as a 'rich guy problem'.

reply