Anyone claimed against the council

[Mpathe]

i've had no trouble with the snow, the s3 has performed well and then tonight ive gone down a road and happened to hit a pot hole thats more like a crater which has punctured my tyre and something is now knocking. so im wondering if can claim as i thought we pay them to look after the roads.

thanks mike

 

[<tuffty/>]

Good luck with that... I had 2 tyres punctured by a bad road and the excuse they used is that the road wasn't damaged at the last inspection (6 months ago) and no one had reported the road being bad. If they had realised the road was bad then I may have a claim.

Ridiculous!!!!

I told them that if I was in an accident that was caused by a worn ball joint that wasn't picked up by the MOT I had 6 months ago, I could then (based on their logic) not be prosecuted by the police or be responsible for any vehicle I may have damaged or anybody I may have hurt.... they replied with... 'never thought about it like that....'

<tuffty/>

 

[david_phillips95]

Good luck with that... I had 2 tyres punctured by a bad road and the excuse they used is that the road wasn't damaged at the last inspection (6 months ago) and no one had reported the road being bad. If they had realised the road was bad then I may have a claim.

Ridiculous!!!!

I told them that if I was in an accident that was caused by a worn ball joint that wasn't picked up by the MOT I had 6 months ago, I could then (based on their logic) not be prosecuted by the police or be responsible for any vehicle I may have damaged or anybody I may have hurt.... they replied with... 'never thought about it like that....'

<tuffty/>

I had a similar thing happen to me, i hit a manhole cover that was defective and it destroyed my wheels and tyres down one side, i drove a vw lupo sport at the time running bbs rm's and the tyres were near enough new, several people hit the manhold cover that day (8 if i remember correctly) all of them destroying wheels and tyres and not one of them recieved a penny. The council and water board just came away with they are not liable as they could not have possibly done anything to prevent it as it had not been reported when i hit or when anyone else hit it its a disgrace they can get away with it.

The defective manhole:

My wheels looked ok at first but the damage to the inner was so bad the wheels were cracked and beyond repair.

Couldnt find any pictures of my wheels but found one of a guy that had his wheels destroyed, all the people that hit the manhole had torn tyres and damage similar to below:

Might be worthwhile, getting legal advice to see where you stand, that was something i wish i had done at the time. They should not be able to get away with this!!

Davie

 

[<tuffty/>]

...they could not have possibly done anything to prevent it as it had not been reported...

THAT is almost unbelievable as an excuse....

<tuffty/>

 

[RyanJonS4]

A mate of mine hit a pot hole on a country road, that sent him into an embankment. It buckled his wheel, popped his tyre, scuffed his wing and bumper and damaged something in his suspension. He changed his wheel, limped home and reported it to the council the next day. He got it all repaired free of charge, but only because the pothole had been previously reported and the council failed to fill it in. He was told by the council if he was the first to report it, he wouldn't have been able to make a claim!! It took him over a month of making phone calls, sending letters and generally pestering them but was worth it in the end because it would have cost him well over a grand.

Your best bet may be to get a friend to ring the council and tell them that he's hit a pothole but it hasnt caused any damage, Then ring them yourself and report the damage it has caused you. This may not be strictly lawful but it should increase your chances of a payout:icon_thumright:

Ryan

 

[david_phillips95]

THAT is almost unbelievable as an excuse....

<tuffty/>

When it first happened i contacted the water board and they said there would be no problems paying for the damage all i had to do was fill in a claim form. So the claim form arrived through post i filled it out attached with various pictures etc and i recieved a letter sayin the claim was being looked into. Eventually after several meaningless letters i recieved a letter back telling me there would be no payout as they could not have done anything to prevent it so was not their fault. Same thing happened to everyone. One guy i remember drove a new subaru at the time and the costs were well over £1000 to get his car right and he never recieved a penny. Disgrace how they can do this.

 

[Mpathe]

well the pot hole is about 2ft x 1.5ft wide and about 6" deep and must of been there a while.

mike

 

[<tuffty/>]

well the pot hole is about 2ft x 1.5ft wide and about 6" deep and must of been there a while.

mike

Makes no odds unless they know about it so it seems...

<tuffty/>

 

[Andrew@A.L.D]

There was something on 5th gear about making a claim and witnesses were a must + photo's of the road and measurements of the hole that did the damage

 

[danA3T]

I've heard mixed tales of success from the lads at my garage who've claimed against Leeds Council, not sure of the details but I believe that the crux of it are photos of the offending pothole, WITH width/depth measurements etc as the size of it is indicative of how long it's been there. Also believe that they take a letter from a garage as to likely cause along with a claim.

Whilst I think of it, you could always make a "Freedom of information" request to get the council's records as to how well/ when the road was last maintained. Worth making some council penpusher squirm and it might make them give you the ammo you need for a claim.

HTH

 

[voorhees]

Highways Act 1980, s. 58:

(1) In an action against a highway authority in respect of damage resulting from their failure to maintain a highway maintainable at the public expense it is a defence (without prejudice to any other defence or the application of the law relating to contributory negligence) to prove that the authority had taken such care as in all the circumstances was reasonably required to secure that the part of the highway to which the action relates was not dangerous for traffic.

(2) For the purposes of a defence under subsection (1) above, the court shall in particular have regard to the following matters:&#8212;

(a) the character of the highway, and the traffic which was reasonably to be expected to use it;

(b) the standard of maintenance appropriate for a highway of that character and used by such traffic;

© the state of repair in which a reasonable person would have expected to find the highway;

(d) whether the highway authority knew, or could reasonably have been expected to know, that the condition of the part of the highway to which the action relates was likely to cause danger to users of the highway;

(e) where the highway authority could not reasonably have been expected to repair that part of the highway before the cause of action arose, what warning notices of its condition had been displayed;

but for the purposes of such a defence it is not relevant to prove that the highway authority had arranged for a competent person to carry out or supervise the maintenance of the part of the highway to which the action relates unless it is also proved that the authority had given him proper instructions with regard to the maintenance of the highway and that he had carried out the instructions.
thanks southpaw for this info

 

[danA3T]

...well that told me!

 

[quattro rob]

my friend has a lowered punto gt, he hit a pot hole and cracked his arch ( was fibre glass) he got nearly 500 pound of the council to pay for damages. i would get legal addvice