Trees fall on house months after neighbors inquired about permits to cut said trees down

[Winny]

If you've ever witnessed the damage caused by downed trees, you know it can be devastating, especially if it is to happen to your own home.

Resident Tina Uber of West Hills had to deal with exactly that. She knew the trees in her neighbors yard were going to fall down eventually, and wanted to secure a permit to have them cut down. Uber and her neighbor Crystal Gonzales had attempted to apply for a permit, but most of the arborists they went to, declined to give them a permit saying that the trees were more than 12 inches in diameter and were still alive. It is illegal to cut down trees unless they're at risk of falling. When Gonzales got in contact with some of the arborists, they simply told her to wait it out and contact their insurance if damage is to occur. So they'd have to wait until the trees fall to do anything.

Uber and Gonzales finally did find a arborist who issued a permit, but the city of Portland never got back to them about it.

And of course, a massive winter storm came in and resulted in three trees falling down on Uber's home, resulting in some considerable damage. Uber says the damage could have been avoided if the city had acted sooner.

Which is why I think there needs to be a better system in place for situations like this. Especially when it could risk damage to your property.

Do you think Portland will sort this out for her? Or will her insurance have to sort it out?

You can read more on this news here - KGW.com

 

[Jake]

The city should be the ones responsible for repairs, not the insurance. Especially if a permit was filed a while back. I would imagine their insurance could charge the city and state for damages. Because someone's got to pay for the damage, and I don't think it should be the homeowners who were doing their due diligence to get this sorted out. It falls on the state or city to fix it in my opinion, and I hope they do make it right.

 

[Winny]

The city should be the ones responsible for repairs, not the insurance. Especially if a permit was filed a while back. I would imagine their insurance could charge the city and state for damages. Because someone's got to pay for the damage, and I don't think it should be the homeowners who were doing their due diligence to get this sorted out. It falls on the state or city to fix it in my opinion, and I hope they do make it right.

I would expect the city to be responsible, but they will probably just tell them to have their insurance cover it. Though I too would have my insurance outright charge the state for this sort of blunder.

It does sound like the city is going to address it at some point, after they make repairs around the city due to the recent storm they had. So maybe they can be the good guys and actually pay for the damages. Because if I was in the situation, I'd be pretty peeved if my insurance went up because the city decided to force my insurance to cover the damages.

 

[Nomad]

The situation involving Tina Uber and Crystal Gonzales in West Hills highlights a frustrating bureaucratic challenge. The unfortunate outcome of three trees falling during a winter storm resulted in significant damage to Uber's home, which could have been easily avoided had the authorities acted soon. This issue raises a concern. What if people were injured? Who would have been responsible?