PROTECTING Southend’s historic trees has cost taxpayers more than £870,000.

Councillors’ refusal to allow residents to cut down publicly-owned trees which have caused damage to their property has led to nearly 100 compensation claims over the past five years.

Under British law, any council can be forced to pay the costs of underpinning residents’ homes or repairing cracks if it has rejected bids to fell the problem tree.

The authority can only claim the money back from its insurers if an individual claim exceeds £200,000 – meaning the vast majority of the payouts come out of taxpayers’ pockets.

Allan Lowvey, 74, plans to claim compensation after he was refused permission to cut down three mature oaks at the back of his bungalow in Sunnybank Close, Eastwood.

He said: “It just seems to be a bit of stubbornness by the councillors.

“They have been told by the experts the trees need to be cut down, but they don’t want to believe them.

“If you aren’t going to listen to the experts, then how can you make the right decision?”

In Mr Lowvey’s case, surveyors concluded the oaks were sapping the surrounding soil of all moisture, causing his home to subside.

The council’s own tree officers told councillors pruning the roots, or placing underground barriers in their way, would only provide a temporary solution.

But when the case came before the development control committee in August, the bid was rejected after several councillors argued the subsidence could not be traced to a single cause and was an unfortunate side-effect of building on clay-based soil.

Chris Walker, a Tory councillor for Eastwood Park, was one of those who objected.

He said: “You cannot prove it is the trees. This area is built on clay and has long-standing problems with water underneath the surface causing subsidence.

“It is the law at fault. It is a lot of money, but we should not be paying out for this. This is what home insurance polices are for.”