Who do I complain to about badly placed traffic signs that possibly led to damage my

Iceweasel

Note to OP:

Don't even think of a foreign driving holiday - anywhere.

The degree of alertness and awareness needed would tire you out within a few dozen kilometres.

warehouse

The OP has a good point, if the road has a 30mph limit and the OP was doing under 30, then if the speed bumps damage his/her car it's the councils responsibility. It's not difficult to put in speed bumps that are safe to drive over up to 30mph, but it's real easy to be too lazy to do it correctly.

AdrianC

warehouse wrote: »

The OP has a good point, if the road has a 30mph limit and the OP was doing under 30, then if the speed bumps damage his/her car it's the councils responsibility.

No, he doesn't, and no, it isn't. There are guidelines on the size of humps. If they are outside those guidelines, then there may be an issue. Otherwise...? No.

tonyh66

warehouse wrote: »

The OP has a good point, if the road has a 30mph limit and the OP was doing under 30, then if the speed bumps damage his/her car it's the councils responsibility. It's not difficult to put in speed bumps that are safe to drive over up to 30mph, but it's real easy to be too lazy to do it correctly.

the OP thrashed over clearly marked humps at 30mph, probably in his lowered corsa, its his own fault.

GabbaGabbaHey

martinthebandit wrote: »

If, in the circumstances you describe, you were doing 30 when you hit that speed bump you may wish to have a think about your driving skills

If the speed limit on the road is 30mph, then you absolutely should be able to drive over any speed bumps at 30mph without damaging your car. Otherwise the council may well be liable for any damage caused to the vehicle.

molerat

Where is the speed hump - is it that white painted thing under the street lamp ?

bowlhead99

GabbaGabbaHey wrote: »

If the speed limit on the road is 30mph, then you absolutely should be able to drive over any speed bumps at 30mph without damaging your car. Otherwise the council may well be liable for any damage caused to the vehicle.

The council is allowed to put various self-enforcing traffic calming measures (such as speed humps) on a 30 limit road though, and although the regulations don't require it, they seem to have followed the broad government guidelines by siting the hump within 60 metres of a speed-reducting feature (i.e. the junction) so that drivers aren't encouraged to increase their speed to over 30.

If your car is in good nick and you're a competent driver who thinks they can handle hitting the hump at 30, you might choose to do so, without regard for the eggshells you're carrying on the passenger seat. However, proper competent drivers would follow the highway code rule 153:

Traffic-calming measures. On some roads there are features such as road humps, chicanes and narrowings which are intended to slow you down. When you approach these features reduce your speed. Allow cyclists and motorcyclists room to pass through them. Maintain a reduced speed along the whole of the stretch of road within the calming measures.

If the hump is marked (which it is) and there is advance warning (which there is), the council should not expect people to hit the hump at 30, based on the above rule.

If there is a broken surface or pothole in the hump that could cause damage, then that is a fault of the council (if they've been made aware of it). If there isn't a problem with the road surface and the height and angle up and down the hump are within the usual 'safe' parameters, the council doesn't have to set the 30mph limit based on the max speed the absolute worst unroadworthy vehicle can do over the centre of the hump. For example a mobility scooter should probably not try and do a ski-jump off the side of a speed hump.

Many vehicles would be fine over a typical hump at 30mph, though would prefer to go more slowly to preserve more control and get less of a jarring ride, that's why they are known as traffic calming measures. It seems our OP was not calm enough - but this is because he hadn't looked at the "humps for x distance" sign in a red triangle at the entry to the road, nor or at the big white triangle on the hump (which after dark would have been lit from the streetlight directly above).

BeenThroughItAll

bowlhead99 wrote: »

If your car is in good nick and you're a competent driver who thinks they can handle hitting the hump at 30, you might choose to do so, without regard for the [STRIKE]eggshells[/STRIKE] [basket of kittens] you're carrying [to the local convent] on the passenger seat.

Fixed that for you.

almillar

OP is getting a bit of a hard time, based on a bit of a bad attitude, and everyone jumping on.
We can see that there IS a sign at the start of the road, and that it's the speed hump outside the school, which OP says is a SCHOOL sign. You can also see in that Street view photo, that the hump is well marked.
We don't know when the street view photo was taken.
OP - I think it's perfectly safe to post a link to the actual road. No-one can track you down from that, and it's not your own street or anything.
Was the sign meant to be lit, and not lit?
Was the hump as well marked as the street view photo shows? You would do well to take a photo of its current condition, for us or the council. If it's as in the photo, you should have seen it.

robatwork

OP asked a question (Who do I complain to)
He got the same answer from pretty much everyone (ie. to his own driving ability)
He was asked to show where the road in question was, and for reasons of national security won't say, and has now left the thread, as so many do who get an answer they didn't actually want.

I am sure he would prefer: Complain to the council who will happily pay for your car damage and a new basket of kittens.

Even if we all know this is tosh.