A dispute over a better view has turned into a costly legal lesson for a group of neighbours in British Columbia, Canada. A homeowner, Jacalyn Hays, took six neighbours to small claims court after accusing them of cutting trees on her property without permission. The trees stood between the properties and helped block the neighbours' view of Shuswap Lake.
According to court documents released by the Provincial Court of British Columbia on August 19, 2026, Hays had initially agreed to limited trimming. But she argued that the work eventually went far beyond what she had authorised. The court ultimately awarded Hays $35,000, the maximum amount available through the province's small claims process.
Permission was given, but with conditions
Hays said the disagreement began when she allowed her neighbours to trim some vegetation near the boundary of her vacation property. Her permission was not unlimited. She said the neighbours could work on smaller trees and saplings near the upper part of the hillside, provided the trees were no more than three inches in diameter.
She also agreed to some topping of the trees, but wanted at least six or seven feet of each tree left standing. There was another condition. Any branches, trunks or other debris produced during the work had to be cleared away because Hays considered the leftover material a potential fire hazard.
Homeowner returned to find mature trees gone
The tree cutting took place in July 2021, while Hays was away from the property. She was not expected to return until October. When she came back, she alleged that the work had gone well beyond the limits she had set. Among the trees she said had been removed was a mature birch estimated to have been about 50 feet tall. Hays also claimed that substantial amounts of debris had been left behind, leaving her and her son to deal with the cleanup.
The homeowner later confronted one of the neighbours about what had happened. According to the court record, the man said he believed he had permission to cut whatever he wanted.
Recording became important evidence
The case also took an unusual turn because Hays had recorded a conversation with one of the defendants. In that conversation, the neighbour acknowledged that a mistake had been made and said he needed to take responsibility. He died before the court delivered its decision, but the recording was still considered as evidence.
The defendants included William Olthius, Shelly Fenton, Alan Fenton, Elizabeth Fenton, Lee Fenton and Cheryl Fenton. Hays had sought $35,000 in compensation, arguing that the unauthorized tree cutting had caused damage to her property.
Court awards maximum $35,000
The British Columbia court ultimately awarded Hays $35,000. The amount is significant because it represents the maximum that could be awarded through the province's small claims process. The dispute also highlights a point that can easily be overlooked by homeowners and neighbours: a tree may stand close to a property boundary, but that does not automatically give someone else the right to cut it simply because it blocks a view.
What may appear to be a straightforward landscaping job can become a legal dispute when the trees belong to someone else. In this case, a desire for a clearer look at a lake ended with a $35,000 court judgment.
