Kelly Palmer, 40, from Birmingham, admitted she paid a tree surgeon to cut down the huge ash tree outside her house despite knowing it was under a conservation area
A mother smiled outside the courtroom after avoiding a fine for cutting down a huge tree on her driveway, despite knowing there was a tree preservation ordinance in place protecting it.
Kelly Palmer admitted paying an arborist to take down the imposing ash tree – which was said to be a street nuisance – because it was regularly banging against her house in Shirley, Birmingham, claiming the noise was so bad it woke up her young daughter.
Her removal of the tree led to an anonymous complaint to Solihull Council, which prosecuted the 40-year-old project manager as well as her husband Anthony Palmer, who was ultimately cleared of any wrongdoing. Birmingham Magistrates’ Court heard that the ash tree had been protected by a tree preservation order in the 1990s, before the couple’s home in Wiseacre Croft was even built.
But in September last year, according to BirminghamLive, the council was informed that the map had been torn down without its consent. Ms Palmer pleaded guilty to breaching a provision of the bylaw but was given a conditional discharge on Friday, June 21. The same charge against Mr Palmer was withdrawn after he denied it.
Prosecutor Andrew Burton said: “In 2017, Mr Palmer applied to the council for permission to fell the tree. This was refused because the tree had high recreational value. It was mature and in good condition and its felling would have meant a significant loss to the streetscape and visual enhancement.”
“There was no sufficient reason to justify this. There would have been a right of appeal but this was not exercised.” He continued: “In September 2023 the council received an anonymous report that the tree had been felled. Both Mr and Mrs Palmer were sent a letter with a warning and a series of questions.
“Ms Palmer responded. She was cooperating fully with the council. She explained that she had been approached at home by a tree surgeon who said he worked in the area and noticed how large and close the tree was to her house and that overhanging branches were falling onto the footpath.
“He told her that most of the trees had to be cut down because of ash dieback and that he was very surprised that it was still there. Because of the problems they were having, he recommended its removal. She had no contact details. She agreed a price and a date and paid cash.” A photo of the tree overhanging the road from August 2022 can still be seen on Google Street View. Neil Davis, defending, explained that the TPO was granted in 1995, almost a decade before the couple’s house was built in 2004.
He said: “The difficulties and problems the tree has caused the family are numerous. When it was fully grown the ash tree stood 15 feet from the front door. It blocked the drains, there is evidence of that. It was a nuisance to the neighbours and there are letters from both the tenant and the occupier (of the properties next door to the Palmers). It was causing disturbance and you can see that the branches are actually being struck by the wind and banging against their house.
“Their daughter had the front bedroom. Recently she had been unable to sleep due to the high winds and was frightened when the tree knocked on the window. They had to take her out of the bedroom.” Mr Davis added that there was indeed evidence that the ash tree had died down to the tree – as allegedly claimed by the tree surgeon – and that other trees which were the subject of the same TPO had been removed by the local council.
He pointed out that Ms Palmer had pleaded guilty, was cooperating with authorities, had no previous convictions and that just being summoned to court had been a disturbing experience for the couple. “They have suffered enough,” the lawyer said.
Chairman of the court Alex Yip told Ms Palmer she could “put herself out of misery” by avoiding a fine. He said she had “knowingly taken this action” but the full circumstances of the case enabled the court to impose a 12-month suspended sentence. Ms Palmer was, however, ordered to pay £250 in legal costs and £26 in victim compensation.