The stump of a protected giant tree that once stood outside a mother’s home is still visible after she illegally cut it down because it was a ‘nuisance’, MailOnline can reveal.
Kelly Palmer, 40, escaped a fine after admitting she paid a tree surgeon to cut down the massive ash tree because it was blocking drains and regularly banging into her home in Shirley in the West Midlands.
She and her husband, Anthony Palmer, were reported to authorities after they cut down the tree and a small portion of the trunk was still stuck in their driveway.
Documents seen by MailOnline show the Palmers – who have a young child – had complained about the damage the roots were causing to the pipes, as well as the health risks posed by the tree’s bird droppings. Pictures obtained by Solihull Council show Mr Palmer’s car covered in the waste, as well as the tree’s proximity to their daughter’s bedroom.
Birmingham District Court heard that the ash tree had already been protected under a tree preservation order in the 1990s, before the couple’s house was built. The authority had rejected their previous application to remove the ash tree in 2017.
But last September, the city council received a notice that the map had been torn down without its consent.
Kelly Palmer and her husband Anthony Palmer were reported to city officials after they cut down the tree and a small portion of the trunk was still stuck in their driveway.
Mrs Palmer, 40, was seen smiling as she left Birmingham Magistrates Court after escaping a fine for cutting down a huge tree on her driveway, which she said was causing a nuisance to the whole street.
Mrs Palmer admitted she had paid a tree surgeon to remove the imposing ash tree (pictured) because it was blocking drains and regularly banging against her Shirley home, waking her daughter.
A small portion of the trunk is still stuck in the Palmers’ driveway after they had it cut down.
Ms Palmer refused to speak to MailOnline on Monday but left the courtroom smiling on Friday, June 21, with a conditional discharge after pleading guilty to breaching a provision of the regulations.
Charges of the same offence were withdrawn against Mr Palmer after he denied them.
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 appeal.
Ms Palmer (pictured leaving the courtroom) pleaded guilty to breaching a provision of the regulations and was given a conditional discharge on Friday 21 June.
“There was no sufficient reason to justify this. There would have been a right of appeal, but it 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 there were still some left. Because of the problems they were having, he recommended removal. She had no contact details. She agreed on a price and a date and paid in cash.”
A photo of the tree towering over the road from August 2022 can still be seen on Google Street View.
Defence lawyer Neil Davis explained that the TPO was granted in 1995, almost a decade before the couple built their home in 2004.
This aerial photo shows how close the ash tree was to the Palmers’ house
Mr Palmer complained that the bird droppings (pictured on his car) falling from the tree posed a health hazard
The Palmers also claimed that the tree’s roots were damaging pipes
This picture shows how close the tree was to the Palmers’ house
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. There is evidence that it blocked the drains.
“The neighbors have been bothered and there are letters from both the tenant and the resident (of the houses next to the Palmers). It has caused a disturbance and you can see that the branches are actually hitting their house when the wind blows.
“Their daughter had the front bedroom. Lately she couldn’t sleep because of the strong wind and was scared when the tree knocked on the window. They had to get her out of the bedroom.”
Mr Davis added that there were indeed signs of ash dieback on the tree – as allegedly also claimed by the tree surgeon – and that the council had removed other trees which were the subject of the same TPO.
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.
Judge Alex Yip told Ms Palmer that she could “put herself out of her misery” as she would be spared a fine.
He said she had “knowingly taken this action” but given the overall circumstances of the case, the court could impose a 12-month conditional discharge.
However, Ms Palmer was ordered to pay costs of £250 and victim compensation of £26.