Here's the situation - A couple weeks ago a storm came through and did damage to a very large tree on my property. A large section/limb of the tree fell off and crushed a section of fencing between my and my neighbor's yard. Nearly 100% of the limb is laying on my neighbor's property. We initially agreed to try and handle this between us, but that's where this started to take a turn. We called around for some quotes on removing the damaged section. We then called our Homeowner's Insurance companies with both gave roughly the same explanation - that the policy covers only what fell on the insured property. Since nearly all of it is on his property, I'm guessing he didn't like that explanation and called the City Forester who he claims told him it's better if we work it out amongst ourselves (as we had already agreed). Well I'm guessing he made a different push behind the scenes because I received a letter in the mail yesterday from the stating that I have 30 days to remove the entire tree because it was determined to be at "high risk of fail". I very much disagree that the entire tree is at risk of fail, perhaps a branch or two could be trimmed off to clean up all the damage, but I'm not sure that matters at this point. My homeowner's insurance stated that they don't offer any coverage for the removal of the tree because there is no property damage. This is a very large tree and I'm guessing removal would easily be in excess of $5000 which is a significant out of pocket expense that I'd like to avoid. My homeowner's insurance suggested trying to work out something with the city. I'm unclear of how I should proceed legally. Any ideas??