Millionaire businessman ordered to chop down 80ft trees as neighbours complain they could topple on their homes
The huge trees growing on James Turnbull's palatial £1.4 million estate must be cut down following a government decision
A MILLIONAIRE businessman has been ordered to chop down his 80ft trees after neighbours complained they blocked out sunlight and could crush their homes.
James Turnbull's palatial £1.4 million estate borders a row of gardens in the upmarket village of Bridge of Weir, Renfrewshire.
Neighbours claim overbearing trees are ruining their properties and stopping sunlight from reaching their homes.
One neighbour, Hamilton McClements, claimed he slept on cushions in his living room in case trees collapsed and fell into his bedroom.
Related stories
He teamed up with neighbour Robert Gale to take their fight to the Scottish Government after Renfrewshire Council rejected their earlier application to have the trees cut down.
They used high hedge laws - which came into force in April 2014 - to plead with officials to intervene in the quarrel.
Government reporter Robert Seaton has now ruled the trees should be chopped by October.
He said: "I consider that the larches and hemlock opposite the gardens should be removed.
"The removal of these trees should be sufficient to address the matters of sunlight and daylight to the appellants’ properties and their gardens as well as the issues of the dominance of hedge and needle fall, notwithstanding that other trees may be retained.
"Once the larches and hemlock have been removed, it does not appear to me that any ongoing steps will be required to control the remaining trees."
The neighbours row escalated last year when council staff ruled "significant gaps" within the hedge allowed sunlight to pass through and dismissed a bid to have them cut down.
Mr McClements has now welcomed the decision.
He said: "We are relieved to have this decision and look forward to enjoying a sunny garden again after many years in shade."
He had earlier told how he was forced to switch on lights during the day due to trees blocking the natural light.
The 68-year-old said: "These are not especially small windows and it is not unreasonable to expect to be able to rely on light on them alone during daylight hours but for the hedge, no artificial light would be needed until normal lighting up time.
"Surely it is not unreasonable for the owner of a property with a south facing garden to expect to be able to grow grass and ordinary standard plants?
"I'm not looking for the ideal garden - I simply want to regain the enjoyment I had before the trees raced skywards and the sun loungers were put into the loft permanently."
Another neighbour wrote that the high hedge act was a "remedy - particularly against wealthy hedge owners who refuse to consider the impact of their hedges on their neighbours".
Mr Turnbull, 54, who is listed as a director in several companies, had written to Mr McClements insisting he had carried out work to remedy the situation.
He said he had instructed a tree surgeon to carry out work in his garden and claimed he had done more work than he thought was necessary.
He was unavailable for comment.
The High Hedge Act was designed to address disputes between neighbours.
We pay for your stories! Do you have a story for The Sun Online news team? Email us at [email protected] or call 0207 782 4368.