Saturday, November 16, 2024

Wealthy businessman sparks huge row with neighbours after felling SIX protected 100-year-old oak trees outside his £770,000 home

Must read

A wealthy businessman has been lambasted for the felling of six protected 100-year-old oak trees from the front garden of a £770,000 house.

Khalil Hussain, a 67-year-old property developer, was fined the paltry sum of £1,666, equating to just £277.66 per tree.

The oak trees were worth an estimated £250,000 collectively and their felling has contravened a tree preservation order.

Mr. Hussain purchased the house, in the Nab Wood area of Bradford, three years ago for his son and his young family, but despite renovations having been carried out, there is still no one living at the property. 

Mr. Hussain pled guilty to the charge of contravening a tree preservation order before Bradford Magistrates Court last week, and in addition to the controversial fine, was ordered to stump up for £3,000 worth of costs.

Now, neighbours along the affluent tree-lined street are speaking out over the ‘upset and distress’ caused to the local community by Mr. Hussain’s actions.

The before and after images of the property in the Nab Wood area of Bradford

Property developer Khalil Hussain pleaded guilty to contravening the tree preservation order at the house in the Nab Wood area of Bradford

Property developer Khalil Hussain pleaded guilty to contravening the tree preservation order at the house in the Nab Wood area of Bradford

An aerial view of the property on Staveley Road where six 120-year-old oak trees were illegally felled

An aerial view of the property on Staveley Road where six 120-year-old oak trees were illegally felled

Professor Peter Vowden, who had lived next door to the property in Staveley Road for 34 years, said; ‘It has changed the character of this part of the neighbourhood.

‘I am glad he has been found guilty, but I am disappointed with the fine. 

‘It sends the message out that we can all chop all the trees down and there won’t be any trouble. It just wouldn’t be Nab Wood if that were the case’.

First noticing the felling of trees back in the summer of 2021, Prof. Vowden recalled seeing workmen in a cherry picker.

Despite telling Mr. Hussain and the workmen that the trees were protected, he noticed the return of tree surgeons just a month or so later.

At this point, Prof. Vowden alerted the local council, who visited the Staveley Road property, informing Mr. Hussain that unauthorised felling was a prosecutable offence.

In his appearance before Bradford Magistrates Court, Mr. Hussain claimed that the further felling of trees after this council visit was due to damage caused by Storm Otto.

However, Prof. Vowden, a retired vascular surgeon, disputed this, stating; ‘It was nothing to do with the storm.

‘The owner knew from the start they were protected tress. It has changed the complete appearance of the property and has impacted the road… at a time when trees are regarded for their importance, it’s a shame so many have been chopped down’.

Tree surgeons were observed at the property despite Mr. Hussain having been warned about the tree protection orders by neighbours and the local council

Tree surgeons were observed at the property despite Mr. Hussain having been warned about the tree protection orders by neighbours and the local council

Neighbour Prof. Peter Vowden has expressed the 'upset and distress' the felling has caused the local community

Neighbour Prof. Peter Vowden has expressed the ‘upset and distress’ the felling has caused the local community

At the sentencing before Bradford Magistrates Court last Friday, the court was told that the trees had at least another four decades in their life expectancy and that Bradford Council had not approved any of Mr. Hussain’s felling.

Mr. Hussain claimed to be unaware of the orders around the protection of the trees, with Jabran Hussain, defending, arguing that the property developer lived elsewhere and was not present when council officers visited the residence.

Adding that his client had suffered ‘sleepless nights’ from the case, he told the court that although Mr. Hussain was not present for the felling, that he accepted responsibility and wanted to apologise. 

In addition to his fine, the court also ordered Mr. Hussain to replant the six oak trees, with the defending solicitor claiming that a further 31 trees had already been planted at the property.

Reacting to the verdict, Prof. Vowden stated that there was no way to adequately replace the 120-year-old felled oaks.

‘The trees are about the same age as the houses, which were built around 1904. The trees were there at the start.

‘He has planted a series of trees, but they conifers, they aren’t beautiful oak trees which once stood there.

‘He has been ordered to plant six new oak trees, but I won’t be alive by the time they’ve grown to a decent size’.

Latest article