Big trees make small insurers nervous
There’s something reassuring about a mature tree. Shade in summer. Character all year round. Insurers tend to notice the other side of the bargain. Roots go where they like, branches fall when they feel like it, and water behaves differently underground.
Once a tree reaches a certain size and distance from the building, underwriting usually changes.
Why insurers pay attention to trees
Large trees are linked to two main risks. Ground movement and physical damage. Subsidence claims connected to tree roots are expensive and slow to resolve. Storm damage from falling branches can be sudden and severe.
Insurers look at likelihood rather than aesthetics. Species, height, and proximity all feed into that judgement.
Distance and size matter more than ownership
It doesn’t always matter who owns the tree. If it’s close enough to affect the property, insurers usually want to know about it.
A common focus is whether a tree stands within a certain distance of the building and whether it exceeds a set height. The exact figures vary between insurers.
Tree species and ground conditions
Some trees are thirstier than others. Clay soils combined with high water-demand species raise the risk of ground movement.
Insurers often ask about species where known, particularly for trees close to foundations. Unknowns tend to trigger more caution than clear answers.
Subsidence history changes everything
If a property has experienced subsidence before, nearby trees become far more significant. Insurers expect full disclosure of both the incident and any remedial work.
Documentation showing underpinning, tree management, or root barriers can influence how the risk is viewed going forward.
Storm damage and falling branches
Trees also increase the chance of impact damage during high winds. Roofs, fences, and outbuildings are typical targets.
Insurers usually treat this as storm damage, provided the tree was in reasonable condition beforehand. Neglect or obvious decay can complicate claims.
Maintenance expectations tend to be higher
Properties with large trees nearby are often expected to show some level of ongoing management. That doesn’t mean constant pruning, but it does mean dealing with obvious risks.
- Regular inspections by a qualified arborist where appropriate
- Addressing dead or unstable branches
- Keeping records of any professional tree work
- Monitoring changes in ground or structure
Insurers tend to look more favourably on managed risk than ignored risk.
Excesses and restrictions linked to trees
Some policies apply higher excesses for subsidence claims where trees are involved. Others exclude subsidence entirely in higher-risk cases.
These terms usually reflect cost exposure rather than a judgment on the property itself.
Buying a house with large trees
Surveys often flag nearby trees as items to monitor. Insurers may want to see those reports before confirming terms.
Arranging insurance early in the purchase process can highlight issues while there’s still time to gather information or seek specialist input.
Claims investigations tend to go deeper
Where trees are implicated in subsidence or structural movement, claims often involve monitoring and expert reports. These cases take time.
The focus is usually on cause rather than speed. Insurers want to know whether the tree is contributing to ongoing movement.
Why straightforward disclosure helps
Downplaying tree size or distance rarely works. Surveyors and loss adjusters tend to spot what’s growing next to the building.
Home insurance for houses with large trees nearby is common. Outcomes are shaped by proximity, species, soil type, and how openly those details are handled from the start.