Japanese knotweed

The place for serious discussion, announcements and breaking news about Sydenham
Post Reply
Jollylolly
Posts: 114
Joined: 8 Nov 2015 12:28

Japanese knotweed

Post by Jollylolly »

I reported the Japanese knotweed which is at the top of burghill road (where brambles are near Mayow) to the council last year and nothing was done and this year it has grown back in abundance. Reported again but the council says it’s nothing to do with them as private land, but it’s starting to grow up through pavement. I don’t live near the area but maybe some Burghill residents might want to take notice. It’s easily fixed if treated properly, but obviously the longer it’s left the harder it is to treat.
Parker1970
Posts: 512
Joined: 4 Nov 2014 22:36
Location: Anerely

Re: Japanese knotweed

Post by Parker1970 »

Personally I would notify the environment agency rather than the local council. That's what the government website says anyway...

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/prevent-jap ... -spreading
General enquiries

National Customer Contact Centre
PO Box 544
Rotherham
S60 1BY

Email enquiries@environment-agency.gov.uk

Telephone 03708 506 506
Jollylolly
Posts: 114
Joined: 8 Nov 2015 12:28

Re: Japanese knotweed

Post by Jollylolly »

Thanks will send them an email
alywin
Posts: 923
Joined: 27 Aug 2009 12:33
Location: No longer in Sydenham

Re: Japanese knotweed

Post by alywin »

Don't we already have a thread about this nasty (but in my view somewhat exaggerated) problem?
JGD
Posts: 1235
Joined: 5 Feb 2018 11:39
Location: Perry Hill, SE6 (free-transferred to Perry Vale Ward, next to Bell Green; distinct from Sydenham).
Contact:

Re: Japanese knotweed

Post by JGD »

A new ruling from the Court of Appeal on "pernicious" Japanese Knotweed.

If the plant Japanese knotweed has encroached on a property and it can be successfully proved that knotweed that grows into a home or garden originated on an adjoining property, that owner of this adjoining property could be held liable for the cost of its removal and any loss of value.

The judgement also said that homeowners would not be entitled to damages only because the knotweed had reduced the value of their properties, but that there must be evident encroachment and physical damage.

It would open up all sorts of complexities of domino type civil actions where one owner may admit that the plant has encroached on their land from one property and is the source of encroachment on a second property, thus creating a chain of litigants.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/consu ... ion-widget
alywin
Posts: 923
Joined: 27 Aug 2009 12:33
Location: No longer in Sydenham

Re: Japanese knotweed

Post by alywin »

Funny, I thought I read that article the other day and it actually backed up my view that JK isn't actually as pernicious as some make it out to be?
Post Reply