Connecticut 2017 Regular Session

Connecticut House Bill HB05655

Introduced
1/13/17  
Refer
1/13/17  
Refer
2/16/17  
Report Pass
3/10/17  
Refer
3/20/17  
Refer
3/20/17  
Report Pass
3/27/17  
Refer
4/4/17  
Report Pass
4/11/17  
Report Pass
4/11/17  
Engrossed
6/3/17  
Engrossed
6/3/17  
Report Pass
6/4/17  

Caption

An Act Concerning A Property Owner's Liability For The Expenses Of Removing A Fallen Tree Or Limb.

Impact

This legislation impacts state laws by creating a clear guideline on property owner responsibilities regarding hazardous trees and limbs. Previously, liability in such cases could be uncertain, potentially leading to disputes between neighbors. By defining specific criteria for liability and requiring a documented inspection by an arborist, the bill aims to minimize conflict and provide a framework for resolving such matters amicably. Moreover, the law excludes public entities and certain types of properties from its provisions, thereby focusing on private residential situations.

Summary

House Bill 05655 addresses the liability of property owners in the case of fallen trees or limbs from their property onto adjacent properties. The bill establishes a legal presumption that a property owner is liable for the costs associated with removing a fallen tree or limb, provided that certain conditions are met. Specifically, if an arborist has determined that the tree is diseased, decayed, or damaged and likely to fall within a specified period, and if the adjacent property owner gives written notice to the liable owner, then the latter must act to remedy the situation within a set timeframe or be presumed responsible for removal costs.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 05655 appears to be generally favorable among property owners and advocates who seek clarity in liability cases. Proponents argue that the bill provides necessary protections for property owners who take the proactive step of notifying their neighbors about hazardous trees. However, there may be contention regarding the burden placed on property owners to inspect their trees and the potential implications for insurance policies, particularly regarding liability claims related to fallen trees.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the potential challenges property owners may face in complying with the bill's requirements, particularly the need for arborist inspections and the associated costs of such inspections. Additionally, there is concern related to how insurance companies might handle claims related to fallen trees under this new liability framework, specifically whether they will deduct amounts recovered under the provisions of this bill from policy payouts. This could affect property owners' financial obligations and their treatment by insurers when dealing with related claims.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB2013

Property taxation: new construction: damaged or destroyed property.

CA AB1500

Property taxation: application of base year value: disaster relief.

CA AB245

Property taxation: application of base year value: disaster relief.

DC B25-0486

Uniform Community Property Disposition at Death Act of 2023

CA SB964

Property tax: tax-defaulted property sales.

CA SB603

Property taxation: transfer of base year value: disaster relief.

CA SB1091

Property taxation: transfer of base year value: disaster relief.

HI HB1398

Relating To Property.