Connecticut House Bill HB05598

Connecticut 2021 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/26/21
• Refer: 1/26/21
• Report Pass: 3/29/21
• Refer: 4/9/21
• Report Pass: 4/15/21
• Engrossed: 5/25/21
• Report Pass: 5/27/21

Caption

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

Impact

If enacted, HB 05598 could significantly affect statutes concerning property owners' liabilities and neighbor disputes over property maintenance. The bill would create a presumption of liability for property owners, urging them to take proactive measures regarding the health of trees and limbs adjacent to their property lines. This could potentially lead to a reduction in disputes between neighbors, as clear legal standards would be established to determine liability in such incidents. Additionally, the bill might encourage property owners to invest in regular inspections and maintenance of trees to avert potential liabilities.

Summary

House Bill 05598 aims to establish a clearer framework for property owner liability in cases where a tree or limb from one property falls onto an adjoining property owner's land. The bill specifies that the property owner from which the tree or limb has fallen will be presumed liable for the expenses incurred in removing it, provided that certain conditions are met. These conditions include an inspection by an arborist indicating that the tree or limb was diseased, decayed, or damaged, and that the adjoining property owner gave written notice and a chance to remedy the situation within a specified timeframe. This legislation is designed to protect neighboring property owners from damage caused by neglectful tree maintenance.

Sentiment

The sentiment around HB 05598 appears to be generally supportive among lawmakers and property advocates who view it as a necessary step in clarifying existing ambiguities surrounding property owner responsibilities. While proponents emphasize the importance of ensuring that property owners take responsibility for their trees to avoid damage to adjoining properties, some critics express concerns about the burden this may place on homeowners. They worry that the legislation may lead to excessive liability for property owners, especially in cases where natural events could have been the cause of tree damage.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the implications of the burden of proof placed on property owners and the potential for increased liability insurance claims resulting from the bill. Opponents raise concerns that property owners may be unduly held responsible for acts of nature beyond their control, which could lead to contentious situations between neighbors regarding tree maintenance. Furthermore, the requirement for arborist inspections and written notices adds another layer of complexity that some property owners may find challenging, particularly if they are unaware of the health of their trees or unable to access an arborist in a timely manner.