Bollards - can they be illegal

Ms-Money-Penny

My daughter crashed into unmarked concrete bollards last week writing off her car. This was the third accident at the site, the first accident had broken the lights on top of the concrete lumps, the second accident the car had ended up on its side.

The policeman who attended said the bollards were illegal as they were unmarked, no arrow signs nothing just two lumps of concrete in the middle of the road.

She's rang her insurance company and legal cover and they've told her that they need to claim off another driver, they never heard of making a claim against the local city council.

Yet my elder daughter who used to work in motor legal services says she has got a case.

Anyone had any experience of a similar claim.

dogbot

they never heard of making a claim against the local city council

Who are they? Chances are your daughter just spoke to a low skilled, low paid call handler with no legal experience. Legal expenses cover on a motor policy is there to help you claim for any uninsured losses, whoever is legally liable. If there is liability then there is a claim, and determining that is the tricky part.

If the council have been negligent or could be regarded as strictly liable then you have a case... but more details would be needed and some study of case law.

At first glance, I would say there could be a chance. If there have been previous instances of crashes and the council have failed to take reasonable steps to make the road safe, then this seems like negligence to me but a solicitor needs to take a look. Any takers out there chaps?


To clarify, these are concrete bollards in the middle of a two way street? What is the posted speed limit? Are they part of other traffic calming measures or a crossing that is otherwise well illuminated? Have you taken lots of photos of the accident scene? Are there photos from the time of accident?

Is she insured fully comp or TPO?

If your daughter is fully comp and the insurer is paying out for the total loss of the vehicle then they will be keen to pursue recovery. If this is the case, get her to call the claims department and ask to talk to the file handler or a senior technical handler about the situation.

Ms-Money-Penny

dogbot wrote: »

Who are they? Chances are your daughter just spoke to a low skilled, low paid call handler with no legal experience. Legal expenses cover on a motor policy is there to help you claim for any uninsured losses, whoever is legally liable. If there is liability then there is a claim, and determining that is the tricky part.

If the council have been negligent or could be regarded as strictly liable then you have a case... but more details would be needed and some study of case law.

At first glance, I would say there could be a chance. If there have been previous instances of crashes and the council have failed to take reasonable steps to make the road safe, then this seems like negligence to me but a solicitor needs to take a look. Any takers out there chaps?


To clarify, these are concrete bollards in the middle of a two way street? What is the posted speed limit? Are they part of other traffic calming measures or a crossing that is otherwise well illuminated? Have you taken lots of photos of the accident scene? Are there photos from the time of accident?

Is she insured fully comp or TPO?

If your daughter is fully comp and the insurer is paying out for the total loss of the vehicle then they will be keen to pursue recovery. If this is the case, get her to call the claims department and ask to talk to the file handler or a senior technical handler about the situation.

The concrete bollards are in the centre of a two way road normal 30 MPH speed limit, no other traffic calming measures, its a very wide road. she was overtaking parked cars and clipped the concrete as she swung back in.

She was taken to hospital as a precaution and when we returned to the road two hours later plastic cones with lights and arrow signs had been placed there.

The polcie attended and a local witness told her it was the third time since christmas.

Will ring the council concerned tomorrow. I've phoned a couple of Accident Helplines and they all said they don't do council cases.

Anybody have any further advice or would this be better on another board.

geri1965_2

I don't think anyone can give any better advice than has already been given, without seeing photographs.

Is the vehicle comprehensively insured? Does she have legal expenses cover? I know these questions have been asked already but we could do with knowing the answers as it will have a bearing on the advice given.

RabbitMad

So basically your daughter was travelling too fast, hit a stationary object and now wants to balme somebody else. Nice.

What if the bollard had been a little child standing on an island in the middle of the road waiting to cross instead?

However, try to claim of the council, put everybodies council tax up a little bit just because you daughter can't look where she is going or slow down whilst passing parked cars.

What I don't understand is why the police aren't doing her for driving without due care and attention?

darich

RabbitMad wrote: »

So basically your daughter was travelling too fast, hit a stationary object and now wants to balme somebody else. Nice.

What if the bollard had been a little child standing on an island in the middle of the road waiting to cross instead?

However, try to claim of the council, put everybodies council tax up a little bit just because you daughter can't look where she is going or slow down whilst passing parked cars.

What I don't understand is why the police aren't doing her for driving without due care and attention?

Exactly right.
The bollard will NOT have been in the middle of the road - they will have a kerb surround and may or may not be marked although i don't think that's a legal requirement. Almost certain in fact.

If your daughter has clipped a bollard that's behind a kerb then she's either driving on the pavement/island, driving too fast to contro lthe vehicle, or is unaware of the size of her vehicle. Or a combination of more than one of the above.
In any case, the bollard behind a kerb means your daughter was driving on an area clearly designated "not for vehicles" and as such will have no claim.
I work for the council and have seen several people try to claim for incidents like this. One driver cut a corner on a new streetscape scheme and hit a new stainless steel bollard which was approx 450mm from the kerb (the normal distance). In the office we simply laughed at the claim and the driver was sent a reply to the effect that he has no claim and should not be driving on the footway.

cogito

If the bollards were originally lit, they were lit in order to warn motorists of the hazard. If the lights had been damaged, the council had a responsibility to replace them and if they knew about it and failed to act, they would have difficulty in defending a claim. They have a legal responsibility to maintain the highway and there is a good chance of a claim succeeding.

Same thing with potholes in the road. Councils don't repair them because it's cheaper to pay a few claims for damaged vehicles and has the side effect of slowing traffic down.

dacouch

Could you post a google earth link or google street view etc to the bollards as this could help a lot

RabbitMad

cogito wrote: »

If the bollards were originally lit, they were lit in order to warn motorists of the hazard. If the lights had been damaged, the council had a responsibility to replace them and if they knew about it and failed to act, they would have difficulty in defending a claim. They have a legal responsibility to maintain the highway and there is a good chance of a claim succeeding.

They were damaged at Christmas according to the op so 3 months for the council to repair the damage is not unreasonable.

To the OP was the accident during daylight?

cogito

RabbitMad wrote: »

They were damaged at Christmas according to the op so 3 months for the council to repair the damage is not unreasonable.

To the OP was the accident during daylight?

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Ms-Money-Penny

RabbitMad wrote: »

So basically your daughter was travelling too fast, hit a stationary object and now wants to balme somebody else. Nice.

What if the bollard had been a little child standing on an island in the middle of the road waiting to cross instead?

However, try to claim of the council, put everybodies council tax up a little bit just because you daughter can't look where she is going or slow down whilst passing parked cars.

What I don't understand is why the police aren't doing her for driving without due care and attention?

A - She wasn't driving fast she had only just pulled away from traffic lights

b They are concrete lumps in the middle of the road without a ker
(WILL UPLOAD PHOTS IF I CAN FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO IT)

C This happened at 10 pm at night so i don't think a child would have been stood there and she would have seen a child it's a bit difficult to see concrete lumps at floor level when the're not lit up as they previously had been.

So until you know the full facts don't assume they're all young drivers are racers.