‘National Trust won’t help after its tree damaged our 500-year old cottage’

Ruth Emery of the Telegraph investigates after a reader was left £20k out of pocket

Dear Ruth,

I am asking for your help as we are so very disappointed in the lack of support and care that we have been shown by the National Trust.

We live in a 500-year-old Grade II-listed cottage surrounded by National Trust land. On September 15 a branch from one of its trees, a horse chestnut, broke off and landed on a UK Power Networks electricity cable near our home. The power line was attached to our chimney, which was ripped off our roof and caused terrible damage to our property.

My husband and I were out and my daughter was home alone. She heard the massive crash and ran outside to find the chimney had smashed down on to the roof of our van. A live electricity cable was hanging and swinging only feet away from her in the wind; she didn’t realise the danger, but this could have been fatal.

The enormity of this incident slowly transpired and we have spent many hours writing emails, making phone calls and meeting with tradespeople trying to deal with this problem.

The impact on us as a family has been massive. My husband and I have a bespoke dining business, which we run from our home with a prestigious client base. Our van was written off, leaving us without transport to operate our events, and equipment was damaged and needed replacing.

We immediately reported this incident to the National Trust, and were then contacted by its insurer Zurich. After weeks of waiting for a response from Zurich, we were told “up to 90 days” was required to complete the investigation and report, and “we would hear before 24 December 2025”.

That date arrived and we heard nothing, leaving us worrying over the Christmas period.

On December 28, we emailed Zurich asking why we had still not yet heard from them, and on January 5 got a response saying “we’re still waiting for the report from our loss adjuster”.

We have been very patient waiting 90 days for the investigation to happen. But we have been left with huge costs that will continue to build up until this is resolved.

We also recently received our annual renewal for our buildings insurance, which has more than doubled due to the claim we have had to make.

We are asking the National Trust to take responsibility, as we would have to had it been a tree on our land causing damage to someone else’s property.

– KH, Bishops Stortford, Hertfordshire

Dear reader,

When you wrote to me in January, you were at your wits’ end. It was almost four months since the incident occurred, and Zurich had not kept to its 90-day target.

You were understandably stressed about the impact this scary accident had had on your home and business, your finances, and the emotional toll on your family.

You estimate you’ve lost over £20,000 as a result of the chimney being ripped off your cottage. This includes: £5,099 for hiring a van until a new one became available, an £11,000 shortfall between the value your motor insurer paid out and the cost of a replacement van, £500 for sign writing for the new van, £160 to remove the personal number plate and transfer it to the new van, £2,915 loss of earnings for cancelling an event, and £1,398 for two BBQs damaged by the van roof collapsing.

You also suffered a nine-hour power cut, and say you couldn’t risk using the food in your catering fridges and freezers for events, so that’s another loss of £530.

You did claim on your buildings insurance to repair the roof and on your motor insurance (and two lots of £350 excess payments).

You have lived in your cottage for more than 22 years, during which time you have appreciated the surrounding “National Trust greens”. Your husband has even maintained and cut the grass that runs along the boundary in front of your home.

It seemed to me like you’ve been the model neighbour. Sadly, the same cannot be said of the National Trust.

I contacted the Trust and its public liability insurer Zurich to find out what was going on. I was told my enquiry was “well-timed”, as Zurich was finalising its investigation. On January 14 you finally got your response.

It said it could not accept liability for what happened, and “unfortunately, this means we can’t offer you any compensation”.

You were devastated by this news.

A National Trust spokesman told me: “We appreciate how distressing this incident must have been for the family. The Trust has a robust, specialist-led tree inspection system and this particular tree was inspected in October 2024, with no defects identified.

“An independent inspection of the fallen branch, which came down during a yellow wind warning with gusts in the area of up to 45mph, also found no evidence of disease, decay or actionable issues. The insurance investigation found the National Trust not liable for the damage caused.”

Zurich added: “We’re sorry to hear about the issues [your reader has] experienced, and we fully recognise how distressing storm damage can be. The delay in sharing our findings was the result of a thorough and necessary investigation; however, we appreciate the impact this had and have apologised for the time taken.”

You say it’s not a question of negligence, rather responsibility, and given the tree belonged to the National Trust, it should help compensate you for your losses.

You also said the charity – your next-door neighbour – did not contact you to check your family were okay after this incident, or offer any sort of assistance.

I was shocked by how the Trust had behaved. I’ve been a National Trust life member since I was 12, and frequently visit their estates, parks, beaches and so on.

My late father bought my mother membership when they got married, purchased memberships for their four children, and then their six grandchildren. My children are very proud of their “life member plus guest” cards, kindly bought by Grandpa. (This article has echoes of my own experience: Grandad bought National Trust memberships for the whole family – they’re now worth £25k).

The National Trust told me you should claim on your own insurance policies to cover your losses. But, you have already done this, and as outlined, are still considerably out of pocket. Plus, you’re going to be stung by higher insurance premiums in future.

I pressed the Trust to make a goodwill gesture, but it said this wouldn’t be in line with Charity Commission guidance on the use of charitable funds.

However, this seemed slightly disingenuous as ex-gratia payments of up to £20,000 are allowed under the Charities Act, on the basis it is morally correct.

So, I advised you to ask the Trust’s chief finance officer to use its discretion, but you were rebuffed once more, as he told you: “It would not be the right use of our charitable funds.”

Meanwhile, you also complained to UK Power Networks, as the tree branch had fallen onto one of its overhead cables.

It said it had inspected the pole and line in February 2021, and the next review was due in 2027. While it insisted it had not been negligent, it paid you £500 towards your insurance excesses in recognition of the stress and inconvenience.

You have not received a penny from the National Trust, and are now considering your next move.

This could be escalating your complaint within the charity to its director-general, potentially with an independent tree specialist’s report. A specialist could examine the tree’s health, as well as consider whether horse chestnuts should be overhanging power lines in the first place.

I wish you the best of luck.

Ruth