Pothole claim rejected

Dylan80

My wife hit a pothole which required an AA callout and a new tyre. She filled in the forms and sent off the requested evidence. However the council are claiming they are not liable. There reasoning- the road was checked 6 months before (December) and they sent someone to check the road the day after my wife damaged her tyre (she had not reported it by this point) at which time a 'repair ticket was issued for the road.'

This has really confused us, as the council are saying the road needed repairing, hadn't been checked for 6 months but they are not liable.

Any ideas?

parking_question_chap

Is there an appeal procedure? I trust you have taken a photo of the pothole.

Was this a route your wife normally takes?

shaun_from_Africa

Dylan80 wrote: »

This has really confused us, as the council are saying the road needed repairing, hadn't been checked for 6 months but they are not liable.

The council are basically correct.
In order to have a successful claim, you need to prove one of two things.
1/ That the council were aware of the pothole and of the possibility that it could cause damage and did nothing to repair it or took no other action to mitigate any possible losses caused to road users,
2/ That the council failed in their duty to carry out routine inspections on the road in question.
There is no set time limit for these inspections as they depend on the category of road, type and amount of traffic etc.


This is covered by S58 of the highways act.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/66/section/58

bigadaj

Dylan80 wrote: »

My wife hit a pothole which required an AA callout and a new tyre. She filled in the forms and sent off the requested evidence. However the council are claiming they are not liable. There reasoning- the road was checked 6 months before (December) and they sent someone to check the road the day after my wife damaged her tyre (she had not reported it by this point) at which time a 'repair ticket was issued for the road.'

This has really confused us, as the council are saying the road needed repairing, hadn't been checked for 6 months but they are not liable.

Any ideas?

Didn't she see it?

firefox1956

I looked into making a claim against my local council & to be honest it was just not worth it to proceed.
The OP does realise that his/her own car insurance will be subject to a 'No Fault Claim' marker & as likely as not could see their future premiums rise ??

Silver-Surfer_2

firefox1956 wrote: »

I looked into making a claim against my local council & to be honest it was just not worth it to proceed.
The OP does realise that his/her own car insurance will be subject to a 'No Fault Claim' marker & as likely as not could see their future premiums rise ??

Have they claimed on their insurance then?

neilmcl

bigadaj wrote: »

Didn't she see it?

Yeah, cause people drive through potholes for the fun of it.

neilmcl

firefox1956 wrote: »

I looked into making a claim against my local council & to be honest it was just not worth it to proceed.
The OP does realise that his/her own car insurance will be subject to a 'No Fault Claim' marker & as likely as not could see their future premiums rise ??

No need for scaremongering. The OP hasn't mentioned anything about her insurance.

bigadaj

neilmcl wrote: »

Yeah, cause people drive through potholes for the fun of it.

Many seem to, depends on the circumstances but if driving at an appropriate speed and paying due care and attention most potholes can be avoided

robbies_gal

if they didnt put a marker on it till the day after and u can prove when it happened surely they wold have to pay up?

facade

They are only liable if they knew about it and did nothing.
They didn't know about it until the OP complained, because it was fine the last time they inspected it.
Provided they inspect the road at "reasonable" intervals they are in the clear.
Once a year may be "reasonable" for that road.