Pothole claims guide discussion

badlyironed

autosere said:

About 2 months ago I was on the approach road entering the caravan club site in Southport when I went down a pothole which was full of water, It took a slice out of my car tyre, I could,nt stop to take a photo of the hole because I had my caravan connected & I would have blocked the road. On returning home which was 45 miles away I had the tyre checked by a tyre firm, They said it was dangerous to use & get new one, £220 fitted & (wheel needs to be repaired yet). The hole was 2 mtrs square, 440 cms deep & Sefton council new about it but decided not to do anything about it till after the August bank holiday they didn't even cone it off knowing that road would be busy with caravans all day every day. To cut the story short I have now received a letter off their claim handler that it is hard luck, they done all they needed to do & they are not liable. The hole was repaired 2 days after the bank holiday, I have been told they had a duty of care to cone it off for the safety of the public & pursue the claim. Any comments anyone

 So they have admitted they knew about the problem, but had decided not to act? ! This is an admission of negligent. Write back stating that aas they were aware of the problem, and had failed to act that is an admission of liability, and you expect a cheque for the cost of repairs by return, or you will take them to the small claims court!

Cell

badlyironed said:

autosere said:

About 2 months ago I was on the approach road entering the caravan club site in Southport when I went down a pothole which was full of water, It took a slice out of my car tyre, I could,nt stop to take a photo of the hole because I had my caravan connected & I would have blocked the road. On returning home which was 45 miles away I had the tyre checked by a tyre firm, They said it was dangerous to use & get new one, £220 fitted & (wheel needs to be repaired yet). The hole was 2 mtrs square, 440 cms deep & Sefton council new about it but decided not to do anything about it till after the August bank holiday they didn't even cone it off knowing that road would be busy with caravans all day every day. To cut the story short I have now received a letter off their claim handler that it is hard luck, they done all they needed to do & they are not liable. The hole was repaired 2 days after the bank holiday, I have been told they had a duty of care to cone it off for the safety of the public & pursue the claim. Any comments anyone

 So they have admitted they knew about the problem, but had decided not to act? ! This is an admission of negligent. Write back stating that aas they were aware of the problem, and had failed to act that is an admission of liability, and you expect a cheque for the cost of repairs by return, or you will take them to the small claims court!

Not quite. Possibly, but not definite.

If a council is aware of a defect then it will assess whether an urgent or routine repair is required and whether it is practical to mark off the defect. Contrary to public prejudice, and although councils do get it wrong, they're not totally stupid. I'd certainly ask for a review of the defence, though I'm not sure I trust the story 100% given that apparently the defect was 4.4 metres deep! It's crucial to be precise.

I wonder whether the poster took a photograph once the caravan had been secured in the site? It seems not. While it was perfectly understandable that he or she couldn't take a picture at the time as they were heading IN to the club site then presumably they were not leaving and could have popped down to the entrance to take the photograph at their leisure.

As a claims handler I would the failure to do so to be odd. How did they know the measurements so precisely, for example if they didn't visit it (even though it appears to have been misquoted in the post)? 44cm would still be a foot and a half, and 44mm would mean that it didn't meet the threshold for highways potholes which is usually 50mm.

KylieR88

The council denied liability for mine. The road hadn't been inspected for a year. My car was damaged November 2022. See below response from council:

The road where the incident occurred is inspected once each year. The last inspection prior to the incident took place on 17/11/21. At that inspection no actionable defects were noted in the area where the incident occurred. No complaints were received concerning the defect in question.

We accordingly believe that the defect complained of developed between the last pre-incident inspection and the date of the incident.

In these circumstances, liability for the incident is denied. The Council will rely on the statutory defence under section 58 Highways Act 1980.

Section 58 provides the highway authority with a statutory defence against claims if it can prove that any defect, no matter how dangerous, did not exist through any fault on its part at the time of the last inspection. The question of fault is determined by whether or not the authority has in place a reasonable system of inspection and repair.

Not every incident has to have been the legal fault of another. For the reasons given above we deny liability for this incident.

You may wish to seek independent legal advice if you disagree with this decision. Alternatively, the Citizens Advice Bureau may give you free guidance.

allstar_07

Hi all,

I put a claim in to my local council and the claims handlers acknowledged the claim but have failed to respond in the 13weeks. 

Would appreciate views on how to reply to them in the right way? Does it mean they have accepted liability by default?

Thanks

allstar_07

Hi, they've replied now to reject the claim stating it was surveyed two months before and was ok (i have no idea how!). But they did reply after thr 3months so is there a technicality i can use? Thanks

akennerl

I wrecked two tyres on a country road in Derbyshire, pitch black & pouring with rain so I had no chance of taking a photograph. When I was able to return it had been fixed. I submitted my claim to Derbyshire County Council on 12th April together with photographs of the ex- pothole and other documentation they requested. Received an e-mail on 4th May to say my claim had been approved.

All very efficint and painless. Well done DCC!!

Cell

allstar_07 said:

Hi, they've replied now to reject the claim stating it was surveyed two months before and was ok (i have no idea how!). But they did reply after thr 3months so is there a technicality i can use? Thanks

No.

There is no legal time limit for property damage claims to be responded to although the council may have a code which acts as a guide, but it won't lead to a default judgment against them.

They should have sent a copy of the inspection record and complaints for the area (if any). If they didn't, then ask for the records for the 12 months prior to the accident.

culverp

I made a genuine claim against Connect Plus Services (they look after the M25 on behalf of National Highways) when I went down a pothole (or some sort of damage on the motorway). My tyre was so badly damaged, the gel-repair kit that came with the car, as I have no spare wheel, didn't work, so I had to get recovered and taken home. It was then my responsibilty to remove the wheel and take it to a local tyre place to have a new tyre fitted. I claimed purely for just the tyre and it was rejected. I sent Connect Plus Services pictures of the damaged tyre, pictures of my car being recovered and put on a tow-truck and a copy of the tyre receipt, but this was still rejected. Their maintenance criteria for potholes is more than 50mm deep (made safe in 2 hours) 40mm-50mm (made safe within 24 hours). They said they searched their records and could not find any prior report of a defect within the vicinity of my incident, although that is not to say that there was no defect present at the time, but there was no defect falling into the above criteria that required repair that we were aware of. How can I check if this pothole fell into their criteria? I'm not sure how I am supposed to measure the depth of the pothole on the M25 motorway. As I say, this was a genuine claim for only £100.48, the price of the tyre only. It's so frustrating, but what can I do?.............

ClassicMad

I have a claim currently going via the council, and in preparation I have asked for the maintenance records via FOI.  They have replied and asked me for what time period I want these records?  The incident happened at the beginning of July, so what's a reasonable time period?  Thanks

Cell

ClassicMad said:

I have a claim currently going via the council, and in preparation I have asked for the maintenance records via FOI.  They have replied and asked me for what time period I want these records?  The incident happened at the beginning of July, so what's a reasonable time period?  Thanks

7. Responding to a request

The FOI Act requires that a response to an FOI request be provided within 20 working days from receipt.

When responding to an FOI request, attention will be paid to any particular requirements indicated in the request, for example, for information to be supplied in a specific format. If information cannot be supplied in the format requested, the SSRO will indicate to the requester the formats which are available and seek clarification from the requester on which they require.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ssro-procedures-for-responding-to-freedom-of-information-requests/ssro-procedures-for-responding-to-freedom-of-information-requests#:~:text=The FOI Act requires that,supplied in a specific format.