Hello,
Our son damaged his tyre and wheel over 2 months ago in a pot-hole near where we live. He was coming to visit us. The tyre loses air, buckled wheel, and slight pull.
We all live in Lovdon and pay council taxes to LB.
Like most he works, does not take his car to work as he works in the city, car is parked in his garage. He first contacted LB a few days after the incident and was straight away told to claim on his insurance. The hole was very large, approx 16" across. I know because I have driven past it several times. Our son got caught out in the rain and it was dark, so full of water.
He took pics with ruler by side - it was risky as road is busy. About 2 weeks later hole was filled in.
The council still won't pay up. He told them to take them to the small claims.. this was over the phone.
Our son has filed in their claims, took time out to go to Vauxhall for a quote and sent it. He can't really use the car for longer trips.
Is there a standard gal letter around and what obligation does the council have?
Btw, his car is pretty new, 08 plate Astra, very low miles and in good condition.. and he is not try to pull a fast one as he does not have the time for this.
Thank you
Edited by rtj70 on 27/09/2009 at 17:42
|
attn admin, pls correct title to 'pot hole'
tia.
Edited by rtj70 on 27/09/2009 at 17:43
|
|
Done. And corrected a lot of your spelling/typing errors. Perhaps you need advice on fixing/replacing your keyboard :-)
|
|
|
|
They're not necessarily liable just because there's a pot hole. If they are the responsible authority, they are liable if they have been negligent. If a pothole just appears they can't be expected to fix it immediately - they won't even know about it until somebody reports it, or the road has a periodic inspection.
On the other hand, if it's been there for weeks after somebody has reported it, then they would probably have been negligent - they knew, had a duty to maintain the road properly, had ample opportunity to fix it, and didn't.
If it's been there for months, and you have some evidence of that, then you might have a case.
|
There used to be in these cases a distinction between two forms of negligence: "non-feasance" and "malfeasance".
"non-feasance" is where someone has not done something that they should have
"malfeasance" is where they did something badly.
So digging a hole and repairing it poorly would be "malfeasance", but if a pothole occurs without intervention by the responsible person, that's "non-feasance".
AIUI, It used to be the case that councils could be sued in relation to roads for malfeasance, but not for non-feasance. Because of that, it never made sense for a council to patch a pothole unless they could do a really thorough job that would last, because by doing something they'd make themselves liable for what went wrong.
I dunno if that still applies, but it's one complication in sueing them.
A further tangle is that utilities (gas, electric, phone, and water companies) have statutory powers allowing them to dig up roads, sometimes without even notifying the council that they intend to do so. They have some responsibilities in relation to restoring their road openings, but if they screw up the repair, the question of liability for any consequent accidents may be a bit tangled.
So I'd suggest that legal action is unlikely to be straightforward.
|
|
|
|
|
according to honest john councils pay out more in compensation claims than the spend repairing the roads
|
|
If they repaired it quickly after your son "reported it" then you probably have less chance. And if you say you knew it was there as you drive past often (and didn't report it) then that must count against you (but not him).
|
As the Local Authority are responsible for repairing potholes and the vast number of employees that actually work for the LA in many guises; most of home will drive cars, do you think that as responsible employees and the eyes and ears of their employers that they would give their Highways Dept a quick bell to report a pothole when they arrive to work thus saving their employers and their wage payers trauma and expense. :-S ?
I very much doubt it.
|
do you think that as responsible employees ... that they would give their Highways Dept a quick bell to report a pothole
And why didn't the thousands of other "civilian" drivers who passed the pothole give the council a quick bell. Couldn't be bothered? Well we get the roads we deserve then.
I do frequently report potholes on roads I use, but only out of self-interest.
LAs get some stick, but all of the councils I have dealt with make it fairly painless to report (dedicated phone number, or online service) and almost invariably the potholes are fixed within a couple of days because they now can no longer claim they don't know about it if someone then sticks in a claim.
|
Ask the council to provide the name of its insurance company and then contact the company direct.
|
Not sure if the info given on 5th Gear regarding pot hole damage is any help?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9GPXVqMIi4
ps, regarding the request for a moderator to edit the header title, your edit button works for 5 mins after your post or until someone replies to your post (whichever is the sooner)
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 28/09/2009 at 01:15
|
|
His own reply will have stopped the ability to edit. He'll know in future as a newby from 2007.
|
Is it worth the hassle?
You may win and recover your £200 - 300 outlay, but then you have to tell your insurer you have had an accident and disclose it when requesting quotes at renewal time. You would be honest, wouldn't you?
|
You may win and recover your £200 - 300 outlay but then you have to tell your insurer you have had an accident and disclose it when requesting quotes at renewal time.
Since an insurer's main concern is in identifying which drivers are likely to have an accident, I doubt they'd be thrilled by someone who they could label as unable-to-avoid-potholes. That description may be unfair in this case, but that wouldn't stop it being used.
|
|
Paul - the Highways Act 1980 (ish) requires the council to keep maintenance/inspection records. the Lord Justice Woolf reforms refer to small claims, such as this. both parties are encouraged (which pretty much means 'must') exchange full details with each other. you must show them your pictures and be specific about your claim (have you got photos of your damage?) They must furnish you with their maintenance and inspection records. they are unlikely to want to do so. You should keep an accurate record of the time you spend in preparing your case, going to get damage fixed etc and suggest a reasonable cost for these expenses. tell them if you proceed to court you will be claiming these, the court application fees, lost time at work, all on top if you win. I did all this, in exactly the same circumstances less than two years ago. their first response was pretty much what you got. When I gave them the whole lot, as above, I got my cheque. Your only gamble, which I would suggest is in your favour, is in their record of maintenance and inspection. If they haven't got it, or they haven't done it for an unreasonably long time, then you're in.
|
|
Sorry, a bit more. I disagree that you have to reveal an accident to your insurer if you get paid out by the council but you can simply ask your insurer if they consider the hypothetical circumstance to be revealable without telling them it happened.
|
|
