# Forum Home Renovation Retaining Walls  Neighbours's tree pushing against retaining wall - need advice

## cross1216

Hi, 
I am looking for some advice in regards to a retaining issue that is caused by Neighbour's trees.  
My neighbour have 4-5 tall palm trees planted very close to the retaining wall about 5 years ago. I purchased the house 6 months ago and at the time of the purchase, the retaining wall was already failing, the building and pest inspector have clearly noted in his report that the failing of the retaining wall is due to the tree planted close by.  
I am concerned about the safety risk the failing retaining wall is posing on my family, especially if the retaining wall collapses, it is likely the tall palm tree will go down with it and collapse onto my house or somebody standing nearby.  I have put some reinforcement as a temporary measure to hold the retaining wall but there is no point replacing the retaining wall until the tree situation can be rectified because it will just fail again.  
To date, I have brought up the issue with the neighbour and his response was the tree and retaining wall has been here all along and there were no issues. Though I don't know him on a personal level but we generally get along with each other.  
What should I do in this case? Do I approach the neighbour again and talk to him more seriously or contact the city council? (My house is located in Brisbane City Council catchment area).   
Any advice is appreciated.  
Thanks in advance.  
Ed

----------


## Pulse

A properly built wall won't fail due to palms, unfortunately I think it wasn't built with sufficient footings. If the wall fails, the palms won't wall on your house. 
The retaining wall is below natural ground level and is on your property so would be rebuilt at your cost. 
Cheers Pulse  
----

----------


## phild01

Which property got benefit from the retaining wall.

----------


## Marc

If it was nsw you are right but since it is Queensland we don't really know do we.
Retaining walls fail for a number of reasons, the main being lack of drainage.
However we have a building report saying the wall is failing do the the palm trees.  
Then, unless I can go and see by myself and poke around and look behind the wall I wouldn't venture a contradicting assessment site not seen.
Cross your problem is that you bought a property with a defect. THat is, you knew about it before you bought it so the insurance will not help unless they are really dumb. You could try waiting another 6 month and try your insurance for luck.
If you want to know who is responsible for the wall ask the council, each state is different. 
To settle a dispute you need a solicitor or Council mediation. Good luck.

----------


## Pulse

As Phild was pointing out, most of the time the property that benefits from the alteration from natural ground level is responsible for the wall. It looks like the wall is there to provide a flat area for the carport and is wholly inside the boundary. 
It looks like the whole wall is on a lean. I'd probably expect a tree to cause local failure. Looks like a pretty average garden in the photos, a besser block wall should not have any trouble in that situation    
You can trim the roots if you do replace the wall    
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

----------


## joynz

Hi Cross 
I imagine that you have budgeted for the repair, based on the prepurchase inspection results.  So now just a matter of finding out if there is any legal obligation on the part of your neighbour to share the costs.  
It is possible that the problem is not tree roots, but lack of drainage and other construction elements in the wall (footings, reo etc).   
Talk to Council.

----------


## Marc

Do a search under retaining walls in queensland see if you can find something further to this.   http://www.hpw.qld.gov.au/SiteCollec...nd-filling.pdf https://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/plan...retaining-wall https://www.qld.gov.au/law/housing-a...a-fence-owner/ https://www.lawanswers.com.au/thread...ponsible.3232/

----------


## ringtail

New laws in QLD. The person on the low side of the wall is 100% responsible for the wall and it's well being. Obviously there is an argument as to what has caused the failure. A structural engineer can do a report for you if you wan't to take it to court but you certainly won't have a neighbourly neighbour if you go down that route.

----------


## phild01

> New laws in QLD. The person on the low side of the wall is 100% responsible for the wall and it's well being.

  Oh great, my property is on the high side, dumped a heap of fill to level the land, and my neighbour has to maintain the retaining wall... what did I miss!

----------


## ringtail

> Oh great, my property is on the high side, dumped a heap of fill to level the land, and my neighbour has to maintain the retaining wall... what did I miss!

  Yep, that's about the size of it. Every Saturday morning they have a lawyer on ABC radio. The question comes up all the time. Fencing and retaining walls are such a huge issue that the Qld gov made new rules that lump everything into the one act. Problem is, some of the laws are not only retarded but cause more issues that ultimately end up in QCAT or court if over $25k.

----------


## Bros

As I said in another post my son is looking to buy a house. Two he was interested in from the on line photos looked OK but when we went to look at them one had a retaining wall the height of the house 2 m from the side of the house and another had several retaining walls the highest would be over 2 m high. This was omitted in the photo's so I said walk away as boundary retaining walls like this can be a huge problem in the future.

----------


## ringtail

Absolutely. Run away.

----------


## Marc

> Oh great, my property is on the high side, dumped a heap of fill to level the land, and my neighbour has to maintain the retaining wall... what did I miss!

   Not quite ... in NSW the person that owns the retaining wall is the one that made the wall necessary. Most of the time it is the person on the underside, that cuts the land to make it flat and build. However if someone decides to level the land by filling and retaining, the wall then belongs to him.

----------


## Bros

> However if someone decides to level the land by filling and retaining, the wall then belongs to him.

  After 15 yrs how do you know what was natural ground level.

----------


## intertd6

The boundary line is really the deciding factor, one side or the other makes it the sides property, straddling the line adds the complications. Trees can indeed push over retaining walls, lift buildings & crack reinforced concrete.
inter

----------


## phild01

> Not quite ... in NSW the person that owns the retaining wall is the one that made the wall necessary. Most of the time it is the person on the underside, that cuts the land to make it flat and build. However if someone decides to level the land by filling and retaining, the wall then belongs to him.

   Yes, but this is about our northern neighbours.

----------


## intertd6

> Yes, but this is about our northern neighbours.

  One would think the boundary line would dictate ownership.
inter

----------


## Marc

In NSW there is the law of support. whoever takes away what supports the natural land must erect a retaining wall and of course maintain it. That is what I refer to as he owns it regardless of placement. The same applies to fill.

----------


## Bros

> In NSW there is the law of support. whoever takes away what supports the natural land must erect a retaining wall and of course maintain it. That is what I refer to as he owns it regardless of placement. The same applies to fill.

  Again I come back to the question as to how find out which party went away from filled ground. I built a small retaining wall on my land and the highest section of 1.2m was backing on to council land. I put a plan into council and they told me that retaining walls under a meter didn't need approval, that was 20 yrs ago. What it is now I do not know.

----------


## Marc

Sure, a common problem but surveyors come into place if there is a dispute. They have ways to establish what was and what is. Most disputes come at time of building where the problem is rather obvious. Old walls that fail that are on the boundary are another cause of disputes since most people assume the fencing laws apply. They do not.  
I own a property that has two retaining walls 50 meters long on each side, both 1.2m high aprox and both built on the boundary one brick on each side and by the original owners 40 years ago paying half of the cost each. The one uphill from me failed 10 years ago and I had to replace the lot at my cost. The one downhill is on the brink and I have already explained to the new owner what the law says, but I don't like my chances. I'll approach him again suggesting to call in a concreter to make 4 or 5 concrete pillars to extend the life of the wall another 10 years or so.

----------


## phild01

> Sure, a common problem but surveyors come into place if there is a dispute. They have ways to establish what was and what is. Most disputes come at time of building where the problem is rather obvious. Old walls that fail that are on the boundary are another cause of disputes since most people assume the fencing laws apply. They do not.  
> I own a property that has two retaining walls 50 meters long on each side, both 1.2m high aprox and both built on the boundary one brick on each side and by the original owners 40 years ago paying half of the cost each. The one uphill from me failed 10 years ago and I had to replace the lot at my cost. The one downhill is on the brink and I have already explained to the new owner what the law says, but I don't like my chances. I'll approach him again suggesting to call in a concreter to make 4 or 5 concrete pillars to extend the life of the wall another 10 years or so.

   Was that a cut and fill that created the need for retaining walls both sides!

----------


## Bros

> The one uphill from me failed 10 years ago and I had to replace the lot at my cost. The one downhill is on the brink and I have already explained to the new owner what the law says, but I don't like my chances. I'll approach him again suggesting to call in a concreter to make 4 or 5 concrete pillars to extend the life of the wall another 10 years or so.

  Can get even worse than that. The property I mentioned previously with the 2 M retaing wall on the uphill side the owner has build a large shed at the min distance from the boundary (600mm) and if the retaining wall started to fail there then comes the problem if it affects this shed.
A bloke once told me and I see it is right it will cost you as much to get a block of land that is flat then pay less and pay for retaining walls. Where I am now the retaining wall is mostly backing on to council land that due to its topography will never be built on.

----------


## cross1216

Thanks all for the feedback.  
If I called a surveyor and have a building and pest report stating the tree roots are the cause of the retaining wall failing then would it be reasonable to ask my neighbour to remove those trees (at his cost) before fixing the wall problem? I don't want to put in another wall just for it to fail in 5 years time.  
Cheers

----------


## cross1216

> Do a search under retaining walls in queensland see if you can find something further to this.   http://www.hpw.qld.gov.au/SiteCollec...nd-filling.pdf https://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/plan...retaining-wall https://www.qld.gov.au/law/housing-a...a-fence-owner/ https://www.lawanswers.com.au/thread...ponsible.3232/

  Thanks mate, some good info there, I will read it through

----------


## Marc

> Was that a cut and fill that created the need for retaining walls both sides!

  Phil, I once called my insurance company that sent me an insurance policy excluding floods due to sea level rise. I argued that unless they define sea level rises, floods in our area are caused or aggravated by the rising of the sea at high tide, so I wanted a clearer definition of the exclusion.
The reply came in this terms ... "we do not deal in _what ifs ... "_

----------


## Bros

> Thanks all for the feedback.  
> If I called a surveyor and have a building and pest report stating the tree roots are the cause of the retaining wall failing then would it be reasonable to ask my neighbour to remove those trees (at his cost) before fixing the wall problem? I don't want to put in another wall just for it to fail in 5 years time.  
> Cheers

  On Saturday mornings on the ABC radio there is a solicitor who give advise to callers. He seems to be pretty switched on and he seems to get a lot of complaints about neighbors trees amongst other things so you may be better to wait until next Saturday and phone in and see what he says.

----------


## Pulse

personally, if they were my trees, I'd like to keep them, when the wall gets removed, you'll quickly see the reason for failure. 
people near us have an 800mm besser block wall with a 40m gum next to it, 800mm trunk diameter, a huge tree and not one crack.  
I think if it is built properly it will be fine, the trees give you both privacy   
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

----------


## Marc

If my grandpa had wheels he would be a tramway.  :Biggrin:

----------


## ringtail

> On Saturday mornings on the ABC radio there is a solicitor who give advise to callers. He seems to be pretty switched on and he seems to get a lot of complaints about neighbors trees amongst other things so you may be better to wait until next Saturday and phone in and see what he says.

  I listen every week. Fences, walls and wills make up a decent % of calls

----------


## Bros

> I listen every week. Fences, walls and wills make up a decent % of calls

  And last week trees on the boundary.

----------


## ringtail

Yep. Certainly enough for me to never buy a house with a retaining wall

----------


## chalkyt

What is the cost of demolish (by you) and rebuild to suit the circumstances (by a brickie) vs making the lawyers rich? Maybe you might even get a contribution from the neighbour if there is a risk of him losing his trees and dirt into your place.

----------


## TradieDesk

If you can show that the tree is the sole cause for the damage to the wall, that is "but for the roots of the tree, the retaining wall would do its job of retaining" then the neighbour would be left with two questions; 1) Does he/she remove the tree and fix one retaining wall; or 2) does the tree stay and the owner pay for multiple fixes to the wall each and eery time the tree roots cause damage. 
Check to see if your State has some other way of resolving dividing fence issues, but the generally accepted resolution is as above.
Isn't there an old saying about neighbours and good fences?

----------


## Marc

What you say is true but unfortunately it is not a fence it's a retaining wall.

----------


## TradieDesk

> What you say is true but unfortunately it is not a fence it's a retaining wall.

   If the retaining wall is benefiting only the person whose property it is on, it is the responsibility of that sole party to maintain it.  However, if a neighbour is creating some damage to the retaining wall, and by doing so is causing the retaining wall to no longer 'retain', the neighbour is obligated to minimise that damage.  Therefore, they should take steps to prevent further damage so that the wall can continue to do its job of retaining. 
At the end of the day, the best thing to do is speak with the neighbour and prey that they are one of the few reasonable people out there that will work with you to reach the best outcome for both of you.

----------

