A REVIEW of the Holyrood law intended to stop outbursts of “hedge rage” has already received complaints about it failing to work in practice.
MSPs on the local government committee announced last week that they would examine whether the High Hedges had made a difference since coming into effect in 2014.
The law was designed to help resolve disputes between neighbours over outsize hedges such as Leylandii, which can dwarf houses and cast them into permanent shade.
The legislation defines a high hedge as a row of two or more evergreen or semi-evergreen trees or shrubs over 2m tall which block the light.
People unhappy with a high hedge can apply to their council for a “high hedge notice” if their neighbour’s greenery “adversely affects the enjoyment” of their home.
Councils can then issue enforcement orders to owners and, if ignored, cut down the hedges.
But within days of the review’s launch, two members of the public raised ongoing problems.
One said she and her neighbours had “hit rock bottom” after “fruitless” discussions with council officials about a group of 50ft trees which cast homes into darkness, caused plants to die and turned gardens to mud, and whose falling branches damaged sheds and garages.
Another person asked for help with a case involving “the overshadowing of solar panels by a row of neighbouring trees and the aggrieved party has offered to pay for pollarding”.
Committee convener Bob Doris said: "While it can be a rare occurrence, overgrown hedges can be a serious nuisance - especially when they lead to disagreements or 'hedge rage'.
“We want to hear from those with experience in this area so that we can give a considered view to the wider parliament on whether or not the Act could be improved."
The committee has asked for submissions on the definition of a high hedge, appeals and enforcement procedures, fees and costs, and the impact of the law on people’s lives.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here