Court told how six 100-year-old trees were illegally felled

The trees, in the Nab Wood area of the Bradford district, had an estimated value to the local environment of £250,000.

Khalil Hussain has appeared at Bradford and Keighley Magistrates Court, pleading guilty to a charge of contravening a tree preservation order.

The 67-year-old was fined £1,666, amounting to £277 for each protected tree that was felled.

He had claimed he did not know tree orders were in place on the oaks when they were felled.

Khalil Hussain leaving court (Image: T&A)

The court heard that between July 21, 2021 and March 3, 2023 six large oaks that were protected by Tree Preservation Orders had been removed from the grounds of 11 Staveley Road – an area notable for its large, tree-lined properties.

Such orders protect trees from being felled or any other major works, and permission is needed from local Councils to carry out any work to protected trees.

Joanne Gleeson, prosecuting the case on behalf of Bradford Council, said: “All six trees had been in good condition, all over 100 years old. They had a life expectancy of at least another 40 years.

“Bradford Council had not approved any work to these trees.

“The trees had significant value, individually and collectively – they added greatly to the pleasing green character of the neighbourhood, and they had valuable ecological benefits.

“The defendant bought the house shortly before the first tree was felled.”

Magistrates were told that one of the trees was felled after the Council had already informed Hussain the trees were protected and that he should not carry out any further work. He was told unauthorised work was a prosecutable offence.

Mrs Gleeson added: “A tree preservation specialist has estimated that combined value of the trees was between £120,000 and £250,000.

11 Staveley Road in 2008 (Image: Google)

“The defendant had the means to find out about this tree order. He had also been visited by an officer, when he could have sought further advice.”

She said that estimated value was the value to the local community and the environment.

Jabran Hussain, defending, pointed out that although the defendant owned the property, he lived at Coniston Grove in Heaton. He was not present when officers visited the Nab Wood site.

He said his client had suffered “sleepless nights” due to the upcoming court case, and added: “My client is 67 years old, and it is right to say he has an unblemished record – this will be his first conviction.

“He never thought he would appear in court at this stage of his life.

“He purchased the house for his son. At the time of purchasing, he wasn’t made aware of the tree preservation order.

“Five trees had been felled before he was made aware of the TPO.”

He said there had been no further tree work after he had been made aware. Explaining the loss of the sixth tree, Hussain said: “In February 2023 the UK was hit by Storm Otto. This tree was partially uprooted and had to be felled.

“My client has had no financial benefit of these trees being felled.

“He bought the property for his son – as all parents would want to help their children.”

He said it was not the defendant that had arranged the felling, but as the owner accepted responsibility.

Mr Hussain added: “There was no malicious intent. It is not a case of flagrantly disregarding an order. He wants to apologise to the court.”

He said even with the loss of these trees, there were still 15 mature trees in the garden of the property, and a further 31 trees had already been planted.

Hussain would also be required to plant six replacement oak trees.

Mrs Gleeson pointed out that the 31 trees planted on the site were part of a conifer hedge – not mature oaks. She added: “The area is called Nab Wood – it is known as being an area of mature trees.

“I understand that not everyone knows about Tree Preservation Orders, but if you buy a property for £700,000 it is reasonable to assume that the trees on the site have some kind of protection.”

Magistrates fined Hussain £1,666 and ordered him to pay full costs of bringing the case to Bradford Council – an additional £3,000.