Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


38 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. That's my worry. As each party is usually liable for their own costs in the small claim court but not at Fast Track or Multi Track. I've been to through the small claims and fast track processes previously and was hoping to keep it to the small claims due to it being more informal and the cost implications. I was going to keep the claim amount lowish. It's not about the money, it's the principal and the council being accountable. Almost 7 months after my accident I am still having ongoing tests to establish the extent of my injuries and have been told that I will never have full movement in my left arm following the injuries
  2. I have photographic evidence of the pothole, witnesses to the accident and medical evidence re the injuries sustained. However I need to prove that the council were negligent. They inspected the road in May 18 and identified that the hole was big enough to warrant repair. So they can prove that they have a schedule for inspection. That's in the Council's favour. They need to show that they have an adequate system in place for the reporting of potholes. This, in my opinion, is debatable but I'd need to get a judge to agree with me. They need to show that they have an adequate system in place to repair potholes which are large enough to warrant repair. I need to get to the bottom of this. They identified that the pothole was large enough to warrant fixing but did they fix it? They haven't advised. If they didn't fix it, they could be held liable. However if they did fix it following their inspection in May 18 was the repair reasonable? If it was repaired why were the potholes present in Feb 19? Although to add confusion, they state there were no potholes in November 18 when the road was inspected. So I need to get to the bottom of the repairs. It doesn't matter that they accept that a pothole caused the accident and injury, I need to prove negligence. I'm not in a position to issue proceedings but just wanted to know whether this type of claim could be made in the small claims court.
  3. "In order to question the validity of their pre-accident inspection we would need to be able to prove that the defect was in situ at that time, would have been deep enough to require intervention and that it was missed. Whilst I take on board your comments, I consider it likely that a Judge at trial would prefer to rely on the inspection records and dismiss your claim." We know from the inspection report that the pothole was present in May 18 and was scheduled to be fixed, ie it was deep enough to require intervention in accordance with the Council's own rules / guidelines. What we don't know is whether it was fixed and if so whether the repairs were reasonable. I would want to know this prior to pursing any action.
  4. I'm waiting on copy correspondence but they've denied liability, as you would expect. I'm told that they've not disputed that there was a pothole which caused my injury (& which they have subsequently repaired) but they are maintaining a section 58 defence. I know from their inspection report that they were aware of the pothole in May 2018 and that it should have been repaired. They say it was but I haven't been provided with any evidence. Maybe the solicitor has it but hasn't provided it yet. However, I do know from the inspection report that there are other potholes which they were aware of which weren't repaired. My solicitor said it'll be difficult to prove the size of the hole at the time of the accident however I have photos and they have confirmed in writing that it was large enough to warrant repair and have subsequently repaired it. I'm also told that it'll be difficult to prove that they were negligent but I'm coming at this from the view that they were aware of it in May 18 & I had my accident in Feb 19. I want them to show that a) they fixed it and b) it was fixed adequately. If it was fixed adequately why had it reappeared in Feb 19? Thanks
  5. Thanks Andy The council are already aware. I did have a no win no fee solicitor but he won't proceed on this basis.
  6. Hello Hopefully the title sums up what I want to know. I'm considering taking legal action against my local council for injury sustained due to a pothole. The council have not disputed that there was a pothole and that it caused my injury but I'm told that I will have an uphill battle to prove that the pothole was sufficient enough to warrant repair (although it has subsequently been repaired) and that the pothole was missed during inspections. I know for a fact (in writing) that they were aware of the pothole in May 2018 and that it warranted repair. But I do not know if it was repaired. I had my accident in February 2019. If the pothole was repaired, I need to prove that it wasn't repaired sufficiently. I can prove that the council have not repaired other potholes reported to them effectively but need to do more digging to get to the bottom of the pothole in question. But what I'd like to know in the first instance is what court system I need to use? Can I use the small claims court? Or is that just for commercial claims? Of course if anyone wants to add any other comments that would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.
  7. Thanks for the comments. Honestly, I'm not worrying. I'd just like to understand why the charge is not enforceable. Thanks
  8. Photo of signage attached. As this is a TfgM car park does Byelaw 14 apply? I'd never heard of this till yesterday and have done a little reading. Byelaw 14 is part of the Railway Byelaws but according to the signage the car park is for tram users only not rail users. However, signage in the car park does state tram and trail station this way, with an arrow, which would indicate that train users use it. Also, if it does apply, not sure how this helps. Sorry if I'm being stupid. Thanks in advance again Metrolink Rochdale signate.pdf
  9. Sorry, but how do I add a photo of the t&cs which are on display? Will also scan the charge notice when I get to work But don't know how to do that either
  10. Morning According to TfgM it's owned by them and Care Parking monitor the car park. I've had a quick look online and can't find the full t&vs, so I've emails TfgM requesting a copy. I can only find info regarding overnight parking. Thanks
  11. For a windscreen ticket (Notice To Driver) please answer the following questions.... 1 The date of infringement? 05 December 2018 2 Have you yet appealed to the parking company yet? [Y/N?] N if you have then please post up whatever you sent and how you sent it and the date you sent it, suitably redacted. [as a PDF- follow the upload guide has there been a response? please post it up as well, suitably redacted. [as a PDF- follow the upload guide] If you haven't appealed yet - ,......... have you received a Notice To Keeper? N (NTK) [must be received by you between 29-56 days] what date is on it Did the NTK provide photographic evidence? 3 Did the NTK mention Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) [Y/N?] N/A 4 If you appealed after receiving the NTK, did the parking company give you any information regarding the further appeals process? N/A [it is well known that parking companies will reject any appeal whatever the circumstances] 5 Who is the parking company? Care Parking 6. where exactly [Carpark name and town] did you park? Metrolink Rochdale .............. if I wait for an NTK will I be entitled to the 40% "discount" still? Seems an awful lot of info that they need to provide including the period. Does this just mean the day or do times need to be provided as well? That would be tricky. Morally car was parked in an electric car park space but just don't see that there was an alternative and already paying alot more train fair since other car park closed making it nor difficult to park.
  12. Thought I'd answered the questions in the link It was a windscreen ticket, issued today and states parking charge notice. I've not entered into any correspondence with them. I've not had a NTK as the parking charge notice was only issued today. Note the link states that they have to do within a timescale but the reduced charge time period will have expired by then. It says on the back of the notice that failure to pay within 28 days may result in the charge being passed to the registered keeper whose details may be requested from the DVLA under the reasonable cause criteria of recovering unpaid parking charge notices and that the charges notice has been issued lawfully and meets the criteria of schedule 4 of the protection of freedoms act 2012. It then goes on with the usual jargon about passing on to debt collectors and solicitors. Thanks
  13. Hello It's a parking charge notice issued today by Care Parking at Metrolink Rochdale. The ticket was stuck to my windscreen. I haven't entered into any correspondence with them yet. Thanks
  14. Evening all After some advice please. Did post in FB but received a moral telling off . As the title says petrol vehicle was in an electric vehicle bay. Ticket is for £100 or £60 if paid in 14 days. There were no other spaces available. It wasn't a case of being lazy otherwise the car would have been parked in a motorbike or disabled space which are closer to the entrance/ exit. Driver has a train season ticket and the car park is for tram and rail users (the t&cs actually state it's for tram users only but the signage say trains and trams this way.....!). Driver used to travel from a different station but northern have closed the car park at the station of choice to use as a site office for work to the station. But have ran out of money, aren't doing work but have kept the car park closed. Now paying 30% more for a train ticket to travel from a station with a car park. The only other option would have been to drive 15 mins home, park up and catch a bus and whilst this would have been an additional cost, would have been cheaper than a parking ticket. But would have taken approx 90 mins rather than 10. The car was in an electric space but where could the car go? There was nowhere else to park & a train ticket from that station had already been purchased and situation has been made worse by Northern closing a car park at another station close by. I spoke with a warden this evening who suggested appealling and wished me luck. If I appeal as the registered keeper how can they prove who was driving the car / parked it? & without breaching GDPR how can they find out who owns the car / drove the car and enforce the ticket? I think that £60 / £100 is excessive considering there was nowhere else to park, driver already had a train ticket from that station and driver is paying 30% more for train ticket since northern closed other car park. After a bit of advice please. Thanks in advance.
  • Create New...