Car accident - help please

Chippy_Minton_2

sane01 wrote: »

I am not very good at explaining myself am I.

Not really, you'd better get some practice in if this matters goes any further.;)

sane01

The driveway is maintained thats why he was going so fast, not a bumpy track and if they had a problem with the track then they would refuse to come up the track which would mean alot of walking as they would be refusing to go up alot of tracks.

Actually to the person who does not think I am very good at explaining, I gave a rough idea of what happened because I was actually asking if anyone new of a professional that could help, although I am very grateful for all the helpful comments.

sane01

How do you know Royal Mail could sue the landowner, do you have an example of such a case.

Bowling_4_Gold

sane01 wrote: »

How do you know Royal Mail could sue the landowner, do you have an example of such a case.

There was a case actually where RM sued a land ower (don't know if it was on here or in newspaper etc) because their steps were wet and the post lady slipped up.

harveybobbles

http://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/news/whereilive/ac/appleton/4368725.Street_saga_continues/

Bowling_4_Gold

Oh yeah, come to think of it, there was another case locally on South Today where the RM wouldn't deliver to a small village because the road was too steep to drive up, and it was deemed unsafe to cycle up so the poor residents had to march down to the bottom of the hill to collect their post every day...

Poppy9

sane01 wrote: »

How do you know Royal Mail could sue the landowner, do you have an example of such a case.

Royal mail do not have to deliver to a property if they think it places their staff at risk. While the driveway maybe in good condition visibilty is an issue and a factor and if there are no advisory notices in place about speed then RM could decided the landowner is negligent and seek to recover their costs.

The previous postie might not have identified your property as being at risk but this delivery driver will obviously defend his actions to his employer and may bring up faults with the access road, lack of warning / information signs etc. and RM may act upon this.

sane01

Yeah, so I would say that they would have had to refuse to come up or down the driveway before it happened.

Poppy9

sane01 wrote: »

Yeah, so I would say that they would have had to refuse to come up or down the driveway before it happened.

That's no defence as the driver would not have been aware of the hazard before he attempted the route. If there are no warning signs in place he could assume he could travel at the same speed he left the highway which could either be 30mph or national speed limit if it's like some of the lanes around by me.

Lack of warning signs is an issue that RM may decide to pick up on.

Anyway you don't own the drive, I thought the farmer did so it would be him who would be sued.

Bowling_4_Gold

sane01 wrote: »

Yeah, so I would say that they would have had to refuse to come up or down the driveway before it happened.

well yeah but again they would argue that it is up to the land owner to properly maintain the driveway. They will always find some way to wriggle out of liability... this is the Royal Mail were talking about here...