Thread: Damaged Wheel And Tyre From Pot Hole

Hi There.
Does Anybody Know Who To Write To About A Damaged Wheel And Tyre After Driving Over A Pot Hole...
I Know Ya Might Think Im Making A Fuss About Nothing But...
The Pot Hole Was 18 Inches Wide By 12 Inches Long And 3 Inches Deep...
My New Tyre Has Cost Me £118 And My Wheel Is Going To Cost Over £100 To Be Fixed...
With Road Tax Going Up Every Year I Think Somebody Should Be Liable For The Costs..

The other side of the coin is you may have been driving in a careless manner that meant you were unable to see the road imperfection due to speed, and take appropriate action. If a private road, all an owner has to do is say you were unauthorised to use it. If council, they have a duty of care, but they need to know about it first. Main roads are inspected with other roads residents report defects and a free number is provided.

If the Council WERE Advised of the problem and did nothing, then you may have a claim, but you still have to answer the problem of driving into the hole and not avoiding it!

once a pot hole is reported to the council they have limited time to fix it.

Thanks For Your Comments...

Mmm..

Its Not Straight Forward Then..

It Was A Dual Carriage Way And There Was A Car To The Right Of Me So I Could Not Swerve To Avoid It...

Im Sure It Must Have Been Reported Becuase It Was Huge...

I Will Try Writing To The Council Then

I Have Taken Pictures And Measurements As Proof...

So I'll Let You Know How I Get On..

Originally Posted by lamma

once a pot hole is reported to the council they have limited time to fix it.

I don't think this is enshrined in law - they can take as long as they want to fix it, but run the risk of having knowledge of the defect and NOT doing anything about it. This makes them automatically liable, and they're insurers won't be happy.

As their best defence is that your complaint is the first they've had, the motorist is immediately disadvantaged. However, there are solutions like www.fixmystreet.com where problems like these are automatically reported and archived, so anyone with a similar problem can check and see.

I think there is something like a six week limit for them to fix it. came across this some time ago and can't recall the reference now. google time !!

Originally Posted by scaniaman

Buzby, what happens if pothole filled with rain water and thought to be only a puddle? We can't drive round every little dub on the road.
If road defect reported to council, they will send out a form for you to detail damage and claim repair costs.

What if? Easy - if it isn't a hole, you live to drive another day. If it IS a hole, and is unknown to the Council, you use YOUR insurance to pay for the damage, the council being able to use the 'unaware of the problem' defence.

As for your second paragraph, perhaps you should complete the scenario. Yes, the council will send you a form to detail the damage and claim the repair costs. Do you know what happens then?

It is sent to the Council's insurers, who will then reject it, putting you back into the same situation you were before. They have to be found NEGLIGENT in order for a claim to succeed.

If they can prove that the roads are regularly inspected, they have been diligent in ensuring their roads are protected. If a (non Council) digger just happens to remove a section of roadway - creating a pothole - and you drive into it, they are not liable for the damage if their regular inspection program did not show any defects.

I happen to live in an area where the roads are rapidly deteriorating and there is only money to patch, not fully repair. This provides a very uneven road surface and the potential for wheel damage is high. I think the last council minutes reported out of 280 complaints, the insurers paid out on 2, as in all the cases reported the council had done the minimum work required to avoid liability.

Completely contrary to my experience---my council paid up.

'm delighted for you. However the crux of the matter remains- if the Council can state that the defect was unknown to them, there is no obligation for them to do so, as will their insurers.

However, if you are saying your 'council' paid up (and not their insurers) it would beg the question - had they actually got a valid insurance policy? But more to the point for council tax payers, how much are they paying out per annum?

After all the rain, snow and ice we have all had recently i can see this becoming quiet an issue.

the estate where i live the council instructed contractors with in 2 days to check the roads and were out doing patching work with in a week.

There were loads of pot holes too and very poorly patched up all they did was chuck aspelt into the hole rollered it

PF

Originally Posted by MrShed

As a taxpayer, I would have no problem with someone being paid if their car was damaged by a pothole on a council-managed road!

I repeat buzby, the point of due diligence is to remove criminal liability, not civil. Ignorance cannot possibly be a defence to a civil claim.

My personal experience, as stated above, is that they pay out also. As they should!

You're being blinded by the term - I referred to it in its exact exact provenance; the council must have in place procedures to regularly inspect all roads under their control and arrange for defects - when found - to be repaired. It is this 'due diligence' that prevents them being 100 per cent liable for any and all defects in the road and or pavement. If they can prove that they have a regular inspection, then if a problem arises that they have not spotted, or has not been reported to them, they are under no obligation to pay.

As for they Council paying up 'as they should' - do provide a bit more information as to the council area, as if they can pay out for every claim whether spurious or not, I want to discover how they can somehow accept their moral obligations when there are under no requirement to do so.

Again you misunderstand - I wasn't;t twisting your words, simply commending on - based on your statement - that the council will pay out on claims for road damage. You didn't say whether this was policy (to pay out), but I have never come across this before. Sure, there are times when they HAVE to pay out where they are clearly in the wrong, but the fact remains, a council that is unaware of a road defect is NOT liable to pay compensation.

As to your supermarket example - how on earth is this relevant? Are you equating perhaps 10 aisles of groceries to 2,500Km of public roads in a typical public area? Of course staff in a supermarket at responsible for hazards within their premises, as they are expected to be vigilant for these potential issues and to act accordingly.

Of course there are those to have been known to manufacture a slip in order to force some form of compensation, and another reason why CCTV is so popular, it's not all about shoplifting.

I think we agree that the moral argument is that a failing by the council caused the OP to unjustly have to spend money to repair their shortcoming. However if the real world, the moral argument goes to the wall and it is established custom and practice to reject claims using the 'unknown defect' claim and they succeed. This is why I referred to the www.fixmystreet.com site. This is the ONLY opportunity a driver has to gain the intelligence to challenge such an assertion, and gain his rightful compensation. Otherwise, he'll remain at the end of a very long list of unhappy motorists who have been told they should simply drive more carefully!

Perhaps this article from todays paper will support what I mean in a way that cannot be misrepresented?

Evening Times: News

Note, it is the MOTORISTS who are paying out for the damage caused by the potholes, not the councils.