If the tree is growing on her land, then SCC and Amey have acted illegally and she is entitled to sue them and the police for damages as well as seek redress and an injunction against SCC and Amey
Then the overage law applies. SCC and Amey would still be acting illegally. The fact others are warning plod about a ruling in the courts in Birmingham means disregarding it would be contempt of court and render SCC and Amey liable to contempt of court proceedings. The penalties for contempt of court are: Lower courts - Up to 6 months imprisonment or up to £2500 fine or both; High Court - Up to 2 years imprisonment or an unlimited fine or both. In addition to this, the malfeasor's assets can be seized in addition to any custodial or financial penalty. As for that bespectacled clown who appears with irritating regularity misquoting from the injunction, he does realise doing so amounts to contempt of court in itself? He is a very silly, silly man. And those who accompany him and film him orating out of his lower orifice need to be made aware they, too, are likely to fall foul of contempt of court by their actions.
So sad for you you brave lady. Well done for trying.
Was the cherry tree on her land?
Yes it was
If the tree is growing on her land, then SCC and Amey have acted illegally and she is entitled to sue them and the police for damages as well as seek redress and an injunction against SCC and Amey
I'm sorry i might have been misled it was over hanging in her garden..
Then the overage law applies. SCC and Amey would still be acting illegally. The fact others are warning plod about a ruling in the courts in Birmingham means disregarding it would be contempt of court and render SCC and Amey liable to contempt of court proceedings.
The penalties for contempt of court are: Lower courts - Up to 6 months imprisonment or up to £2500 fine or both; High Court - Up to 2 years imprisonment or an unlimited fine or both. In addition to this, the malfeasor's assets can be seized in addition to any custodial or financial penalty.
As for that bespectacled clown who appears with irritating regularity misquoting from the injunction, he does realise doing so amounts to contempt of court in itself? He is a very silly, silly man. And those who accompany him and film him orating out of his lower orifice need to be made aware they, too, are likely to fall foul of contempt of court by their actions.