£92,000 spent by council on securing Oakfield Road tree

Haringey Council has claimed that ‘costs incurred are a result of the direct action taken by protestors’, reports Miriam Balanescu

Credit Julian Hodgson

Haringey Council has revealed that a total of £92,000 was spent on an operation to secure the tree on Oakfield Road earlier this year.

The council’s response to a recent freedom of information request (FOI) reveals that the costly operation ‘to secure, encase and then prevent the tree from being illegally occupied’ in March 2023 was agreed between the arboricultural team, the insurance team and senior managers.

The FOI details that council officers believed that protesters were planning to occupy the tree, with climbing ropes allegedly visible, making the costs “proportionate”.

As part of the response, the council officer continued: “The council believed the county court would grant it the injunction it sought on Wednesday, 15th March and considered that the tree protection costs quoted at that stage were proportionate, given that another local authority had recently incurred costs of nearly £300,000 to remove protestors from a tree under similar circumstances. Incurring around £45,000 in costs, so that the tree could be felled if the injunction had been granted, would furthermore have been much less costly than if it failed to fell the tree and was ultimately penalised by the insurance companies, incurring costs up to £1million.”

The Oakfield Road tree has became the subject of a continuing debate after plans by the council to fell it were put in place last year, when insurance company Allianz claimed the tree was causing subsidence the street’s homes.

Last month, the council gained an injunction against protesters, following a local resident arguing in court that the council’s decision to fell the tree was unlawful. The resident has applied for an appeal against the judge’s overruling.

A council spokesperson said: “The costs incurred are a result of the direct action taken by protestors, given that they had previously twice prevented the council from felling the tree. The possession order meant we had a legal duty to secure possession to prevent unauthorised occupation, as well as to protect anyone putting themselves at risk of injury. The original estimated costs of £45,000 doubled when the court allowed an appeal brought by the homeowner against our injunction. These costs are proportionate when compared with another local authority recently paying £300,000, more than triple the amount, to remove protestors from a tree. If the tree remains, the council risks an insurance claim of up to £1m which is the estimated cost of underpinning. Such a large sum would have a significant impact on delivering frontline services and our ability to plant thousands more trees.”

Local news needs your support

We are proud that we were at the forefront of reporting on the recent local elections. We can’t do this without the support of our readers.

Independent news outlets like ours – reporting for the community without rich backers – are under threat of closure, turning British towns into news deserts.

If our coverage has helped you understand our community a little bit better, please consider supporting us with a monthly, yearly or one-off donation.