A man who warned council officials about a dangerous tree which later crashed into his property is locked in a legal battle for compensation.

Mark Aldous, of New Church Road, Hove, wrote to Brighton and Hove City Council in October 2001 to inform them the tree, on a pavement outside his house, was leaning and appeared unstable.

Experts from the council came and checked the tree but said it only showed minimal movement and declared it safe.

Then in September 2002 Mark returned home and was shocked to find the tree had been uprooted and toppled over, crushing his fence and garden wall.

Mr Aldous, a technical officer for British Telecom, said: "The council should think themselves lucky it didn't hit anybody - it could easily have fallen on passers-by. However, it did knock down my garden fence and damage the wall and the repairs will cost £570."

He said the tree fell during the first severe weather of the winter.

"The council said there were exceptionally strong winds that day but I don't believe it was just coincidental.

"There must be 500 trees in New Church Road and the only one that didn't weather the storm was the one outside my place."

Mr Aldous said he had tried to claim the cost of his repairs back from the authority and had taken legal advice but he had been forced to pay the bill himself.

"I have already paid £350 to repair the wall - I had to for safety's sake because mothers and children walk past it on the way to school every day. It is going to cost another £220 to repair the fence and gate.

"I don't see why I should have to claim by going through my insurance company. All I am trying to do is recover my losses but I feel like I am in a David versus Goliath battle.

"We pay our council tax on the dot and if I crashed into one of their dustcarts, they would want me to pay for that.

"But they don't seem to apply the same rules to themselves. This just seems like double standards."

A spokesman for the council confirmed an inspector examined the tree outside Mr Aldous's garden about a year before it fell over.

He said: "Our inspector found no visible defect or signs of instability and therefore had no reason to consider it dangerous.

"After full consideration of Mr Aldous's compensation claim, we have repudiated it on the basis that it was not our negligence that caused the tree to fall over but the exceptional weather conditions prevailing at the time.

"If Mr Aldous wishes to challenge our decision, he can of course do so through the normal legal channels."