The trying tree surgeon
This week Matt and Dan have been on the trail of a dangerous tree surgeon. Shaun Varey has been caught precariously wielding a chainsaw and overcharging his customers by hundreds of pounds.
First off Matt goes to meet Peter and Pam Heath who employed Shaun Varey when he was trading as Beechwood Tree Services (based in Bromley, and not to be confused with any other businesses of the same name). Shaun approached Peter back in August 2009, when he was working in his front garden and asked him if he needed any work doing. Peter had a tree that he wanted taken down as it had been damaged in a storm six years previously. Shaun started the quote for the work at £700, coming down to £500, Peter told Shaun that he still could not afford that price and the pair settled on £250. Shaun started the work straight away.
Peter was horrified when he went to inspect his garden. Shaun and his men had left the tree strewn across the lawn; they had broken Peter and Pam's fence and damaged their shed. Despite this, Shaun still expected payment in full. Peter said, "They packed up their tools, and said that they was leaving but they wanted their cash and if they didn't get their cash they'd do damage to me property." Intimidated by Shaun's threats Peter paid up and the Heath's were left with a £150 bill to clean up the devastation.
Earlier this year Shaun signed undertakings with Bromley Trading Standards promising to amend his business practices. However, after talking to the Heaths it was apparent that Shaun had not changed his ways. Rogue Traders found a house in Bromley, rigged it with secret cameras and hired actress Pauline to invite Shaun Varey out to do some work.
Pauline's job for Shaun was a straightforward task. She wanted him to move three smallish trees from the garden along with the tree stumps. Our expert James Pinder stated that a reliable tree surgeon would charge no more than £200 for this job.
When Shaun arrived at our house he was no longer Beechwood Tree Services but now Green Leaf Tree Services (also not to be confused with any other businesses of the same name). Shaun inspected the trees, incorrectly identifying all of them. He called a Common Ash a Mountain Ash, he said a Prunus was part of the Lime family and he said a Viburnum shrub was a Bay tree. He also told our actress that the removal of the tree stumps would be impossible and suggested poisoning the stumps would be a more effective way of killing them. He quoted £630 for the job. Our actress asked him once again to remove the tree stumps, this time Shaun told her that if she really wanted them out it would cost her a further £1000 so Pauline settled on poisoning the stumps.
Shaun and his team got straight to work, but alarm bells started to ring straight away. Shaun's clothing and that of his teams, their behaviour and the way they wielded their saws lead our expert to believe that they were not trained tree surgeons. If Shaun is not trained to commercially operate chainsaws then he's breaking the law. Shaun's workers also put their hands dangerously close to the chainsaw, at one point Shaun stepped back onto a chainsaw and he even got something in his eye while was working. Shaun's team finished the job within 30 minutes, however he did not poison the stumps, despite telling Pauline he had.
Before he left Shaun offered to prune the Hazel tree which we decided to take him up on.
Shaun arrived back at the Bromley property a week later but before he started work Matt had a few questions about the way he conducts his business. Matt pointed out our expert had managed to remove the stumps that Shaun claimed were "impossible" to get out and informed him that he didn't poison the stumps even though he said he had. Shaun apologised and when Matt asked for a refund Shaun assured us that we'll get that back. Shaun also said that all the other customers who he'd overcharged, or done a bad job for, would also get a refund too.
We are yet to receive a refund from Shaun. He has told us that he has a cash flow problem and we will receive a refund in 3 to 4 weeks.
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~49~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
so for him to be within the law he would have to have a chainsaw licence, which is a 4 day course. is this correct.
Complain about this comment
Hi,
Just watched your show (its still on).
The tree surgeon piece- you showed the 'correct' clothes to wear when using the chain saw?
Your in studio 'model'? he had absoultly no uper body protection - a T-shirt? are ye mad?
He should have the same material of clothes as the pants (ie it will shreed and go 'into' the chain and then jam the chain.
His arms and body are as likely to get kick back strike as the legs.
Yes I an a Safety advisor - which you possible guessed.
Pleople looking at your piece will now go away and think that no upper body protection is required.
You need to correct this perception.
Regards
Liam
Complain about this comment
ok on your Video of him turning up to complete the second job he had someone in the back of his truck while driving so in evect the person had no seat belt and not safe at all
was anythign done about this????
Complain about this comment
If you have not done so already; report him to the HSE at Ashford. They could serve a Prohibition Notice preventing him from using a chain saw; as he and his staff have to be trained under The Provison and Use of Work Equipment Regs 1998. They could also could also instigate a prosecution against the company and or him.
Complain about this comment
Health and safety is the only major problem here and if dc99nol is correct then the beeb need some better researchers.
If you pay for work like this without negotiating or getting a few written quotations then you only have yourself to blame when you end up paying over the odds.
Complain about this comment
The lovely Shaun paid my elderly neighbours a visit this summer in Essex. He turned nasty when he was asked to trim a tree in their garden. They had already paid him £150 to cut down an 8ft conifer.
After verbally abusing them and threatening to burn down my house, he showed me that the signwriting on his truck were only magnetic signs that he takes off when he needs to.
I would love to see my neighbours get a refund for all the stress this caused them.
J Harris
Complain about this comment
This man worked on my mothers tree on 28th September, he turned up to do a quote and within 10 mins had talked her into having work done, the men were outside waiting to do the job. The price was rediculous and I went mad. He preys on pensioners by quoting "special prices for oaps" and is intimidating. He asked for cash and even offered to take my mother to the cashpoint. I have been in contact with him since as the job he did was not what she wanted done - so far he has not come back to finish the job as he said he would. I would like to see him put out of business, it is disgusting that businesses are allowed to get away with it. How can I take this further?
Complain about this comment
In response to Alphagraham1's question; In order for Shaun to operate a chainsaw commercially he must hold the NPTC (National proficiency Test Council) CS30 and CS31 certificates of competence. The training and assessment course to obtain these certificates are usually around 4-5 days in duration.
In response to Liam's comment regarding PPE. The HSE guidance on arboriculture and Forestry is given in the form of the AFAG (Arboriculture and Forestry Advisory group) leaflets. The AFAG leaflet applicable to PPE and use of chainsaws is AFAG leaflet 301 (Using petrol driven chainsaws). It does not specify the use of chainsaw protective clothing on the upper part of the body. It explains that a helmet, ear and eye protection are required, Non snag outer clothing is required and Gloves are recommended depending on the task being undertaken.
Clothing containing chainsaw blocking material is available for the upper body, however it is often not used by arborists and foresters as it is quite restrictive and very warm. This can be a safety implication in itself in hot weather!
I hope this information has clarified some of the queries and misconceptions some people may have had.
Complain about this comment
As a follow up to Arbman.
Have a look at leaflet INDG317 - Chainsaws at work. (found quite easlily on the HSE web site)
Under ppe it quotes a - "Upper body protection* – chainsaw jackets to BS EN 381-11"
EN 381 Protective clothing for users of hand-held chainsaws is a series of 'European Norm' standards - which override all local standards (before people reading this have a fit - an awful lot of them are BS standards that are transposed and 'elevated' to EN standards).
As for being uncomfortable and hot? this will depend on the fitness level of the person using the gear. Also what is the objective here to complete the job fast and with high production or to complete the job in a reasonable time safely? If an operator if getting hot wearing the CORRECT PPE (in any task not just chainsaw operation) - then they need to schedule breaks,this could be as often as required - even 10 or 15 minutes (think if how long most people could operate a dangerous machine which requires high physical effort, in any industry and 15 minutes is not a long time).
From your login name (Arbman) i kinda assume that you are Arbor man? - working in the tree industry or tree surgery buisness?
As for clarifying misconceptions I certianly hope you are not suggesting that my pointing out the use of upper body protection is a misconception, then I really think you need to re-aquaint yourself with industry requirements(what I assume is your industry from arbman?).
To be even more pedantic, all work requires a risk assessment - I would reject out of hand any Risk Assessment that was offered to me that discounted the need for upper body protection, indeed I would reject the contractor for being incommpetent for even thinking they could suggest this. I have seen the damage the a high speed cutting tool can inflict - not funny stuff.
I post this reply because I am afraid that your 'misconception' comment may confuse people even further.
Regards,
Liam
Complain about this comment
Clearly this is a common problem. Noticed 2 cowboys this morning in a neighbour's garden - no safety equipment whatsoever (tracksuit pants and a hoody!), performing some sort of bodged tree surgery - cutting off random branches with a saw and throwing them down to his mate below.
Hope they're not ripping someone off!
Complain about this comment
Liam,
For your information I am well acquainted with the arboricultural and forestry industry requirements and resent someone telling me that I should re-acquaint myself with those requirements!
If I may also refer to leaflet INDG317 - Chainsaws at work, Under PPE it quotes a - "Upper body protection* – chainsaw jackets to BS EN 381-11". Please observe the additional note indicated by the asterisk:
* Chainsaw jackets can provide additional protection where operators are at increased risk (eg trainees,unavoidable use of a chainsaw above chest
height).However,this needs to be weighed against increased heat stress generated by physical exertion (eg working from a rope and harness).
The sentence ‘this needs to be weighed against increased heat stress generated by physical exertion (eg working from a rope and harness)’ is key, And it is why you will see that the majority of contractors/climbing arborists will choose not to wear one. Your suggestion of taking breaks every 10-15 minutes would be ideal in the mind of a generic health and safety advisor but in reality it would be completely impractical for a climbing arborist, as it can often take in excess of that time just to ascend the tree let alone undertake dismantling or pruning operations! However I will accept that chainsaw protective jackets would probably be a very good idea for people carrying out tree work from a MEWP (Mobile elevated work platform), as it is less physically demanding and restricted movement is less of an issue.
Following on from your comment ‘I would reject out of hand any Risk Assessment that was offered to me that discounted the need for upper body protection, indeed I would reject the contractor for being incompetent for even thinking they could suggest this’. If this is the case, I think that you would be very lucky to actually find a contractor that you deemed competant! You would certainly be eliminating a great number of highly qualified, skilled, experienced and SAFE contractors, that are adhering to industry guidance and best practice and that are operating legally!
I posted a comment on this forum because I not only encourage high standards of practice in my industry (arboriculture), but I also care about my industry and how it is perceived by the general public. I wanted to make it clear to the general public that an arboricultural contractor is quite within their rights to use a chainsaw without wearing a chainsaw jacket. The model used to demonstrate the necessary PPE on the programme was correct.
Regards
Paul
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
View these comments in RSS