My neighbour has 3 Yew trees in her garden which border my property. At this time of year the trees grow a pod which is full of pollen, when these hit the ground, they explode releasing the dust which I am allergic to and cause me hayfever symptoms. All 3 trees have preservation orders on them and some officious little prig from the council came to see them (after me asking for some pruning to be done them) and I was told in no uncertain terms that I have no rights (not even the right to light) as the trees were there first and the builder who built my house (in the 1950s) shouldn't have built it so close to the trees! Surely this can't be right. Can trees have more rights than humans?
So you want your neighbour to cut down her legally protected trees which were there before the house was built let alone before you bought it simply because they give you have hayfever at a particular time of year?
I have hayfever too it's unpleasant but I take some tablets for a month or so and it's not a problem.
I find it pretty hard to drum up sympathy for you I have to say and unless they form a hedge over 2m high I don't think you'll have any joy getting your way ( and not all that likely then with a TPO )
It's not the trees that have the rights - it's the rights of other people to continue enjoying them without having someone having them cut down because they've taken a dislike to them
You are not entitled to prune them if they have a tree preservation order on them. The trees must have been there when you bought the house. That officious little prig is someone who is doing their job properly and protecting trees can you imagine if everyone who wanted trees cut down just said they had hayfever ? You are entitled to apply for permission to cut whatever overhangs your property but it sounds as if it would be refused. I agree with jake-the-peg.