Naturenet: High Hedges
High Hedges
the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003
N
ot all trees improve people's quality of life. The problems
that can be caused by high garden hedges - especially leylandii - have received
a lot of publicity, and since 2005 there's been a law all about it.
This page is about the legislation in England which came into force on 1 June
2005. 
Part 8 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 created new procedures to enable
local authorities in England and Wales to deal with complaints about high hedges.
It is clearly better if disputes can be settled between the parties concerned,
but where negotiation fails, a complaint can be made to the local authority
who can assess the case, acting as an independent and impartial third party.
If they think it is justified the authority can order the owner to reduce the
height of their hedge. But there is no general requirement that all hedges
should be kept below a certain height. In particular it is not illegal to plant
leylandii, and it is not illegal to have a hedge more than 2m high. Both of
these are myths which are often repeated, but are incorrect.
The bad news for complainants is that the Council will
charge a fee for this service, and you have to pay a fee just to make a complaint.
Sounds unfair? Maybe, but that's the way it works. Fees are set locally and
vary from about £100
to more than £600. Some give discounts, some don't. So far, there's no
sign of any way to claim the fee back from the hedge-owner either.
The rest of this page applies to England only.
Complaining to the local authority should always 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 cannot settle their hedge dispute, they can take their complaint
to their local authority provided that all of these are true:
- The hedge in question comprised wholly or predominantly of a line of two
or more evergreen or semi-evergreen trees or shrubs;
- It is over 2 metres high;
- The hedge acts, to some degree, as a barrier to light or access; and
- Because of its height, it is adversely affecting the complainant's reasonable
enjoyment of their domestic property (that is their home or garden).
In considering a complaint the local authority normally charges the complainant
a fee - this is set by the local authority, and varies considerably from
authority to authority. Some authorities give a cheaper rate to some people
- for example, to those on benefits.
The legislation does not specify the procedures that authorities must follow
in determining complaints. But they should take into account all relevant factors
and assess each case on its merits. They normally need to gather information
about the hedge, its effect on the complainant and hedge-owner and its contribution
to the wider amenity of the area.
In each case the local authority decides, in the first place, whether the
height of the hedge adversely affects the complainant's reasonable enjoyment
of their property, including the garden. If so, the authority then considers
what action, if any, should be taken in relation to the hedge in order to remedy
the adverse effect and to prevent it recurring.
Even if the local authority finds that a hedge is adversely affecting the
complainant's property they may decide that the arguments in favour of retaining
the hedge are stronger and that no action should be taken.
If the local authority decides that action should be taken to resolve
the complaint, they issue a formal notice to the person responsible for the
hedge, setting out what must be done and by when. This is known as a 'remedial
notice'. This can include long-term maintenance of the hedge at a lower height,
but cannot involve reducing the height of the hedge below 2 metres, or its
removal. Although the local authority cannot require such action, the hedge-owner
is free to go further than the remedial notice requires.
One problem which has emerged
with these regulations is that if a high hedge is cut back in one go, it might
die. Whereas it is sometimes possible to reduce a hedge in stages quite successfully.
So there are often difficulties in setting out the way in which this can be
done, and enforcing it. In particular, there has been some debate since the
publication of the regulations about cutting back a hedge by more than one
third. In arboriculture, it is normally bad practice to cut trees back by more
than one third in any year. Some people have worked on the assumption that
this is also true for hedges. However the situation with hedges is not necessarily
the same. The government have made a statement about this controversy (the
extract below is edited for brevity):
"Section 69(3) of the Anti-social
Behaviour Act 2003 prevents local authorities from ordering works that
involve reducing the hedge to below 2 metres in height or its removal.
In our view (based on legal advice), works that would result in the death
or destruction of the hedge amount to the same as removing it and so are
outlawed under the 2003 Act... Within the constraints imposed by the legislation,
it is for local authorities to decide what height the hedge should be reduced
to whilst ensuring its survival...
We do not advise or recommend that
Leyland cypress or other hedges can be reduced by one-third only. There
is no one-third rule... the wide variation in circumstances means that
it is not possible to apply such general rules of thumb.
It has been suggested that our guidance
stipulates that only one-third of a healthy hedge can be safely trimmed.
This is a misunderstanding. Rather, our guidance (paragraph 6.24) offers
an example of how a healthy and vigorous hedge might stand more drastic
cutting than an older specimen, to illustrate how the amount of cutting
that a hedge can tolerate will vary according to the particular circumstances.
If a substantial reduction of the
hedge is required to remedy the problems, it might be preferable to cut
it in stages over several seasons.
If staged cutting was not feasible,
the local authority might order the hedge to be cut to a height which left
sufficient live wood and foliage to enable it to regenerate. Or they might
consider alternative remedies to reducing the height of the hedge, such
as more selective pruning to let more light through. We acknowledge that,
in such cases, local authorities might be prevented from requiring action
to the hedge that would provide a full remedy to the problems identified."
(Source: Local Authority Chief Executives
in England, 20 April 2006, from Baroness Andrews of the ODPM.)
The campaigning group Hedgeline says of this problem:
"Please note that in the case
of very high, established conifer hedges, the Councils are not likely to
give a reduction which will alleviate your problem. There is a serious loophole
in the High Hedges Law. Whatever the height the council thinks the hedge
should be reduced to under the terms of the Act, it will not order that reduction
if it thinks there is any possibility at all of the hedge being killed. This
is because Act states that hedges cannot be ordered to be removed. The Government
Guidance Notes for the councils (section 6.24) states that ordering any reduction
which might possibly kill the hedge is the same as ordering it to be removed.
You may wish also to take into account the fact that your neighbour will
have to maintain is hedge annually to keep it below the height ruled by the
council, and if this is a considerable height, he may well find it easier
to completely remove or to reduce the hedge to a more easily maintained height.
Unless you only want a third or even a quarter off an older very high hedge
please consider carefully before paying your fee to the council."
Both hedge owners and complainants can appeal against the local authority's
decision. They must do so within 28 days starting from the date that the
local authority notifies the parties of its decision. The remedial notice
is suspended whilst the appeal is being determined.
Failure to comply with the requirements of a remedial
notice is an offence. If someone is convicted in the magistrates' court, they
could be fined up to £1,000.
In addition to, or in place of, a fine the court might then issue an order
for the offender to carry out the required work within a set period of time.
Failure to comply with the court order would be another offence, liable to
a £1,000 fine. At this point, the court would also be able to set a daily
fine for every day that the work continued to remain outstanding.
If the work in the remedial notice is not carried out the local authority
have powers to go in and do the work specified, recovering its costs from the
hedge owner. But, there is no requirement or obligation on them to intervene
in this way.
- The
text of the Act is on the HMSO web site, but it's not that easy to understand
it. We suggest you'd do better to read this page first.
- There is also technical guidance from the Planning Inspectorate which gives a lot more detail about how the law should be interpreted. But you'll need to read it carefully - it is not straightforward.
- To help people resolve hedge disputes amicably the government produced a leaflet, Over
the Garden Hedge.
- To help prevent problems occurring in the first place it also provides
advice called The
Right Hedge for You. This sets out alternatives
to fast-growing species such as leylandii and describes the upkeep necessary
to make an attractive, healthy, hedge.
- A technical document was produced by BRE in 2005, called 'Hedge Height and Light Loss'. The aim of this document is to provide an objective method for assessing whether high hedges block too much daylight and sunlight to adjoining properties, and to provide guidance on hedge heights to alleviate these problems. But it is not a statement of the law, and sometimes councils may not follow this guidence.
Naturenet Hedgerows page
Naturenet Law page
Pages marked with this symbol are exclusively written for
Naturenet