Hi I'm a little frustrated to say the least.. ..I've just made a drop off in a street in Newcastle upon Tyne (1.00am) - I noticed when I entered the side road that it was 2 way traffic but had calming area at the entrance/exit for one vehicle only to pass. It had 2 huge black and white "Sharp Deviation" or "Chevron" road signs on two black poles around 15 feet from the junction. I am pretty sure as this road is a normal road with no tight deviations that the wrong sign has been installed. I would assume when a chevron sign has been used it is informing motorists of dangers to tight bends (?) I was unfortunately distracted and forgot the road tethered into a calming area with exit for one vehicle. I parked the vehicle on the right hand side of the road. From that position, I then reversed - checked mirrors etc and haven't noticed the black pole (which is a foot into the road) as the street has extremely poor lighting (it was 1am and the road is nearly in darkness). I've caused major damage to the side of my car with damage done to the side bumper and rear quarter panel before it gets to the wheel arch. I am annoyed with myself but I'm equally annoyed that I can't understand the mentality of why the council has placed a Sharp Deviation sign on 2 black poles with each pole causing an obstruction on the path (for wheelchairs) and the road. It's baffling and I've genuinely can't remember seeing another road with this type of signage. I would like to assume the correct sign which should have been placed is the road would be the mounted yellow plastic signage (yellow and white plastic bollards with a blue arrows). There is also no coloured road surface to inform drivers its a calming area. I would like to know if I have a case to take legal action against the council for damage done to my vehicle. I've obviously made the error by not checking everywhere before moving but feel I have not been helped by the poor decisions of the Council. I have attached the files but will try to also add the photos to this thread too. Hopefully I'm reading this correctly.... I've just searched to see if there is a minimum width which councils are required to abide to for clearance for wheelchairs (as the pole is also cemented into the path). I've found this: The British Government have set a recommended minimum width, to be enforced by local Authorities. What is the minimum width? Answer: "1800mm on access routes to buildings, from bus stops or car parks with a deregation down to 1200mm around existing obstructions -'Manual for Streets 2' CIHT 2010". I do not believe the clearance is 1200mm and will check this tomorrow. If the width is less than 1200mm is the signage illegal? Thank you in advance for any help C

On Saturday morning I was waiting to turn out of a minor road when a car ran into the back of me. The driver admitted fault there and then, it was all reasonably amicable and we exchanged details without issue but they wouldn't tell me who they were insured with. I tried to contact the driver by email, as much as anything just to confirm details were correct, but the address they gave me just had emails bouncing back. I tried the phone number they gave that evening and again on Sunday morning but there was no answer. By this stage I'm worried that I haven't been given true details so phone my insurers to let them deal with it. Had I been able to contact the other driver I would been contacting my insurers for information only. I've just had a phone call from the other driver's insurer offering all sorts of incentives not to go through my own insurer - too late. They claimed I'd be stuck with the excess and the parting shot was a veiled threat that they will delay paying my insurer to keep it an open claim and affect my renewal costs. I'm not due for renewal for a good six months yet but is this likely? My own insurers followed up my phone call reporting the accident with an email stating they would be recovering 100% from the other driver and I'd have no excess to pay.

Hi all, Hope you had a great Christmas. Anyway, about this time last year I was carrying out sub contract work for a company called Betta Living installing kitchens. On this particular kitchen Betta Living made a long line of ordering mistakes supplying incorrect kitchen units and doors. This was nothing to do with us as installers this was all down to Betta Livings Installation management Team. We completed the kitchen as far as we could, around 90% and thankfully left the kitchen completely usable over the Christmas period. We were then asked by BL to return to fit the last two remaining wall units. I should point out that at this point I was already in dispute with BL with regard to already outstanding payments. So, we scheduled a day to return to this particular job but when we arrived they had once again supplied incorrect items so could do no work. Another week goes by and I received a part payment from BL with regard to the previously mentioned outstanding payments. (All this is just background info) So a week later when the new delivery arrived I was asked to return again to which I refused as I was convinced that I would be doing this for free. In short I finally agreed to return on the provision that we were paid the outstanding £400 to complete the work. I was promised that this would happen but being cynical I had the installation manager in question agree to me sending him an invoice via email for the outstanding sum and to reply to this email agreeing to it before commencing the work. I have the invoice together with all of their emails and ours in reply. To this date I have not received any payments from Betta Living with regard to this and would like opinions on whether or not I have a case worth pursuing via MCOL? Any input gratefully received. I think I have got it all down in this post but if any further clarification is need dont hesitate to ask. Many thanks

Can the good people of this forum please explain their understanding of the "foot in door" action that some bailiffs use in connection with Magistrates Court fines please? Does it make a difference if the bailiff just stands there with his foot in the door refusing to remove it but going no further than the threshold or do folk believe it to be an illegal action regardless?

What happens if youre on jobseekers and have broken your foot(on crutches, not walking for 8 weeks etc). Still entitled to payments? Have to show up fortnightly to sign? Appreciate any advice.