AN 'ARROGANT' homeowner who killed a protected tree because it scuppered a lucrative property deal has been ordered to pay £80,000 in fines and costs.

Robert Page, 71, formed an "irrational dislike" of the 65ft Monterey Pine and was "determined" to destroy it after he unsuccessfully applied five times to have it felled legally.

In 2016 the retired chartered accountant agreed to sell his large detached home near Poole Harbour to a developer who wanted to demolish it and build a block of luxury flats.

Page stood to make £100,000 from the deal but planning permission was refused, partly because of the public amenity value of the evergreen in his front garden which was protected by a tree preservation order (TPO).

He arranged to have a deadly herbicide injected into drill holes in its trunk and concrete poured around its roots to "choke" it of oxygen.

As the pine began to wither and die it attracted the suspicion of tree officers at the council who went to Page's home and discovered it had been sabotaged.

A court heard that Page's selfish act had also put his neighbour's property at risk by killing the tree which eventually fell onto the roof of a garage block during Storm Arwen.

He was found guilty of breaching a TPO order with intent to destroy the tree following a four-day trial where he claimed a vigilante had come onto his property in the Lilliput area and killed it.

Judge Robert Pawson, sentencing Page at Salisbury Crown Court, said the "metaphorical shadow" of the tree would continue to hang over Page and his family.

He said: "The history of the matter gives your game away. You made an application to demolish your house. One of the reasons it was refused was because of the Monterey Pine.

"A second application was made to demolish yours and one neighbours house and build a block of two flats.

"Another application was refused – as was your appeal. In June 2018 you made a fateful fifth application to fell the tree within five days.

"In my judgement, you have formed an irrational dislike of the tree or you wanted to get rid of it to secure a favourable financial agreement in the future.

"The evidence showed there had been a determined effort to kill the tree. This was a calculated effort which succeeded.

"That tree cast a literal shadow over your house and garden.

"Now that tree casts a metaphorical shadow over you and your family – your wife and your son. What they have had to put up with is entirely unjustifiable.

"You lied throughout the trial and you sought to pull wool over the eyes of the jury and to deceive them at every turn.

"You were also very arrogant and posed a significant risk to your neighbours (by killing the tree)."

Mark Ruffell, mitigating, said his client had received hate mail as a result of what he did to the tree.

He said: "He has planted a replacement tree there. That will have increasing amenity value in the future. It is in a better position because the other tree was going over the garages.

"The second point is the adverse publicity this case has attracted. As a result of the coverage they have received hate mail. That in itself has a punitive effect on the defendant. There was abuse along the lines of he is going to lose his house.

"He was a man of previous good character. He feels the weight of the conviction in his shoulders and people looking at him."

Page was fined £55,000 – £50,000 for the amount his property has risen in value by the loss of the tree and £5,000 for loss to the public benefit. He was also ordered to pay £25,000 court costs.

Judge Pawson added: "The fine should reflect the success of your offence.

"As an educated man I do not believe for one second that you had not considered the possibility of being caught – you took a considered risk."

If you are interested in court and crime news, stay up to date with all our latest updates in our dedicated Facebook group. To find out more and to join click here.