"I have nothing against children having fun, [but] when they start sitting and looking into our house, blowing whistles... I was just going to see where I sit with privacy with the council."
She confirmed she had earlier made a complaint to police following an encounter with Norman-Oke over her children hitting "hard" plums over the fence with a bat.
"I wouldn't let my children do that," she said.
Oke said her father, Trevor Oke, built the tree house for his three grandsons three months ago.
Following the call from the neighbour, the council ruled the tree house had breached section 17 of the Building Act 2004, which stated all building structures must comply with the Building Code.
The council has defended its actions, saying it was obliged to follow up once a complaint had been made, and had ''no choice'' but to uphold building laws.
Under the Building Code, the tree house required a building consent as it did not meet requirements to be classed private playground equipment, given safety railing on the structure's platform was more than 3m above ground level.
Even if the tree house's height was within the legal limit, it did not ''meet building code requirements around structural integrity and safety from falls'', the council said in a statement.
Norman-Oke, a health and safety consultant, said she had made no progress on saving the tree house since the ''ridiculous'' ruling, but was adamant it was safe.
She was instructed by the council to tear the tree house down by the end of last month, but said her father, the only person that could dismantle it, recently had spinal surgery and was unable to help.
''[It] feels like a gigantic waste of the council's resources,'' Norman-Oke said.
''I'm hoping that I'm not going to have to move it, and that the council is going to come to the party and at least tell me how I can make it compliant.''
Norman-Oke said she was unsure of what was needed for the tree house to be compliant with building regulations.
''All I want is some clear instructions,'' she said.
A letter received by Norman-Oke from the council on June 26 stated the tree house did not comply with four clauses of the Building Code, which included the adequacy of its structure, barriers, durability, and accessibility.
Council building solutions principal adviser Neil McLeod said in a statement the council did not make building laws but was required to uphold them.
''The DCC doesn't go looking for issues like this, but we received a complaint about the tree house which we were obliged to follow up,'' he said.
''The structure doesn't fit any of the exemptions under the Building Act so our staff have no option but to enforce the rules.''
In a statement provided to other media, the council said it would have been happy to provide ''further clarification'' over the breach.
While the original complaint was about privacy, this was not a factor in the council's decision.
The council had received only one other complaint about a tree house in the past three years.
''This was investigated and the structure, which did not meet building code requirements or set back requirements under the Dunedin district plan, had to be removed.''
A spokeswoman said the council would not be cracking down on other tree house owners across Dunedin, and reiterated it only responded to lodged complaints.
