Street mime artists lead silent vigil to protest felling of 123-year-old tree
- last year
A group of street mime performance artists led a silent vigil to protest against the felling of a beloved 123-year-old tree.
Dressed in red cloaks and wearing white makeup, members of environmental group, the Red Rebels, descended on Stroud Green in Haringey, north London, where the future of a plane tree hangs in the balance.
Campaigners have been trying to prevent the felling of the tree since the council announced its plans to cut it down last April.
The council feared it could face paying £1million if it remained standing, as insurance companies Allianz and Aviva claimed that it was causing subsidence to two nearby homes.
But the owner of one of the homes launched a judicial review, claiming the insurers didn't want to pay for underpinning his home so had taken the cheap option of forcing the council into chopping it down.
At the March 16 hearing, the judge was about to approve the council's order to stop protests when homeowner Andrew Brenner launched his own last-minute legal bid to stop the council from chopping down the tree.
However, Mr Brenner’s attempt ended up being in vain, with judge Sir Roy Cranston dismissing the judicial review into the council’s actions on March 29.
He said that Haringey Council had not acted unlawfully in relation to the tree.
While the insurance companies blame the tree for causing the subsidence to the homes, Mr Brenner believes that the houses need underpinning, which the firms are trying to avoid.
Mr Brenner said he was "saddened”, for had the judgment gone in his favour, it would have exposed "the balance of power" that insurance companies have over householders, councils, and communities.
Mr Brenner has been trying to get Aviva to underpin his home since 2014 and outlined the possible solutions when a tree is thought to be causing subsidence.
He asked: "Do you underpin the house with a root barrier that allows you to keep the tree and the house? Or do you take out the tree and try to avoid doing all the work on the house?
"We don't value trees so that's the easy option and the councils are weak compared to the insurers."
He added: "The fundamental problem is that insurers are not helping householders who have these problems and they are using the tree and the council as a way of saving themselves money at the expense of everybody else, including the council, including householders, and including the community.
"All of that is tied up and the balance of power is really uneven. I can't afford what the insurers can afford in terms of legal costs.
"We're going to have to keep fighting. It's not over."
In 2017, Mr Brenner filed a complaint through the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), which said the house could be underpinned without removing the tree, but Aviva did not do this.
The High Court heard a further complaint to the FOS last year had been "delayed" as insurance companies did not submit information in time for the court hearings regarding Haringey’s bid to stop protesters.
Dressed in red cloaks and wearing white makeup, members of environmental group, the Red Rebels, descended on Stroud Green in Haringey, north London, where the future of a plane tree hangs in the balance.
Campaigners have been trying to prevent the felling of the tree since the council announced its plans to cut it down last April.
The council feared it could face paying £1million if it remained standing, as insurance companies Allianz and Aviva claimed that it was causing subsidence to two nearby homes.
But the owner of one of the homes launched a judicial review, claiming the insurers didn't want to pay for underpinning his home so had taken the cheap option of forcing the council into chopping it down.
At the March 16 hearing, the judge was about to approve the council's order to stop protests when homeowner Andrew Brenner launched his own last-minute legal bid to stop the council from chopping down the tree.
However, Mr Brenner’s attempt ended up being in vain, with judge Sir Roy Cranston dismissing the judicial review into the council’s actions on March 29.
He said that Haringey Council had not acted unlawfully in relation to the tree.
While the insurance companies blame the tree for causing the subsidence to the homes, Mr Brenner believes that the houses need underpinning, which the firms are trying to avoid.
Mr Brenner said he was "saddened”, for had the judgment gone in his favour, it would have exposed "the balance of power" that insurance companies have over householders, councils, and communities.
Mr Brenner has been trying to get Aviva to underpin his home since 2014 and outlined the possible solutions when a tree is thought to be causing subsidence.
He asked: "Do you underpin the house with a root barrier that allows you to keep the tree and the house? Or do you take out the tree and try to avoid doing all the work on the house?
"We don't value trees so that's the easy option and the councils are weak compared to the insurers."
He added: "The fundamental problem is that insurers are not helping householders who have these problems and they are using the tree and the council as a way of saving themselves money at the expense of everybody else, including the council, including householders, and including the community.
"All of that is tied up and the balance of power is really uneven. I can't afford what the insurers can afford in terms of legal costs.
"We're going to have to keep fighting. It's not over."
In 2017, Mr Brenner filed a complaint through the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), which said the house could be underpinned without removing the tree, but Aviva did not do this.
The High Court heard a further complaint to the FOS last year had been "delayed" as insurance companies did not submit information in time for the court hearings regarding Haringey’s bid to stop protesters.