Damage from debris in road

mrmot

3 pages and no ones given a second thought to any other road users, that is those road users who could have a serious accident due to the oil on the road. Who will they be able to claim from?

Iceweasel

This thread has lost it's way.

The workers did not 'deposit' rocks or anything else on the 'highway'. Depositing requires it to be a conscious act. Any rocks or stones in the road was accidental, and they were cleared.

Depends on the definition of 'deposit'.

Unfortunately the OP's mother happened along and drove over a rock, instead of stopping, waiting for oncoming traffic to pass and then continue on her way.

The police were of course correct in stating that if rocks were left in the road that would be an offence. But they did not leave them - they swept the road.

If they had packed up all their gear and gone away leaving rocks that would have been a different thing altogether. That is what the police were on about.

Depends on the definition of 'left'.

But I don't think this spill and then clear up is anywhere near 'Deposited a rock on the highway and left it there to the interruption of any user of the highway'.

vaio

mrmot wrote: »

3 pages and no ones given a second thought to any other road users, that is those road users who could have a serious accident due to the oil on the road. Who will they be able to claim from?

if the oil on the road is a consequence of the negligent leaving of a rock in the road then anyone else affected would also be able to claim from the construction site/transport company responsible.

earthstorm

OP you also stated

Additionally I photographed 3 of the workmen sweeping further rubble from the construction site into the road.

so they were trying to clear up when it was safe to do so. they most likely have brushed small amounts of rubble onto a flat piece of tarmac as its will be easier to pick up on a shovel then it will be on a rough surface such as a construction site entrance full of potholes and sunken mud holes made by construction vehicles going in an out all day.

Rolandtheroadie

earthstorm wrote: »

OP you also stated


so they were trying to clear up when it was safe to do so. they most likely have brushed small amounts of rubble onto a flat piece of tarmac as its will be easier to pick up on a shovel then it will be on a rough surface such as a construction site entrance full of potholes and sunken mud holes made by construction vehicles going in an out all day.

Why not just brush it into the "potholes" and "sunken mud holes" on the site to fill them in then?

vaio

john342 wrote: »

Okay, then please explain why it would not apply to successful claims for pothole damage. Surely they should of seen the pothole and either avoided it or stopped, right?

Instead of which councils have paid out £2.5m this year on claims.

"you should have seen it and stopped" isn't a defence or at least isn't a good enough defence to overcome the "it shouldn't have been there" claim and I'd say the same applies to the rock

earthstorm

vaio wrote: »

if the oil on the road is a consequence of the negligent leaving of a rock in the road then anyone else affected would also be able to claim from the construction site/transport company responsible.

so you would want a worker to step out infront of busy traffic to pick up rocks/rubble, so that he can get hit by another driver that cannot see him in the road.
or would you want him to wait for a quite period to sweep the road.

the workers did not go pick up rocks from the site or wagon and then place these in the road.

Anyone should be aware that where their are construction sites their will be an element of rubble/dust etc. so caution should be taken at all times.

Regarding the Oil on the road. if she had stopped after hitting the rock then this would have been contained in one spot, so could have been cleared up easily.

goonarmy

So basically your mum should have stopped and the construction company shouldnt put stuff in the road. But the two are not intrinsically linked. The rubble in question could be from any wagon. They could be done for dirtying the queens highway or whatever but that doesnt make a claim on your mums behalf. And if shes slowed to pass the lorry how could she not stop? No leg to stand on.

Joe_Horner

john342 wrote: »

Okay, then please explain why it would not apply to successful claims for pothole damage. Surely they should of seen the pothole and either avoided it or stopped, right?

First:

a claim for pothole damage where the council wasn't aware of the hole won't be successful. In this case, unless you can show that the contractor knew the rock was there and didn't move it then there'll be no case.

Second (and more relevant):

You keep saying that it's impractical to drive so you can stop safely for an obstacle such as this.

All I'm saying is that that's exactly how I, and several others on here, aim to drive. And we're not the ones with a rock-shaped hole in our sump.

Make of that what you will.

john342

So I can brush whatever I want out on to the road as long as I pick it up later? Also you say it would be unsafe to go out and pick up the rock in the road but apparently it is safe to shovel the debris they just brushed out into the road?

earthstorm wrote: »

OP you also stated


so they were trying to clear up when it was safe to do so. they most likely have brushed small amounts of rubble onto a flat piece of tarmac as its will be easier to pick up on a shovel then it will be on a rough surface such as a construction site entrance full of potholes and sunken mud holes made by construction vehicles going in an out all day.