Pothole Damage Emergency Repair - Advise Please

developer215

Emergency Repair Fit For Purpose?
30th March 2017

I've been having a long running email "chat" with an insurance assessor representing our council's highways contractor.

I've formally claimed for wheel and tyre damage and it's been rejected.

The contractor seem to be adhering to the national standards regarding inspections, repairs and response times etc but...

On 6th Jan 2016 they dispatched a crew to a pothole categorized as an emergency and made a temporary repair, complete with photos and log sheet (which I have via a FOI request).

On 13th Jan 2016 - 7 days later, I struck a pothole in the same spot where their temp repair had been carried out - in other words, it has failed in 6 days. Their temp repair had partly disintegrated and the deep pothole (65mm) reappeared. I have photos of the pothole I hit and the second temporary repair they did the next day, 14th Jan, because myself and others had reported it.
I can't deny they were prompt with their emergency repairs, but my question is, can I argue in court that their 1st repair of 6th January 2016 was substandard as it only lasted 6 days, allowing the pothole to return to the "emergency" state, as recorded again on their data sheet for the date I hit it?

They are saying the temp repair of 6th didn't fail, and that it was the edge of an older permanent repair that failed, but that's not clear in the photos - it's just a deep hole in the same place.
Our emails have been bouncing back and forth for over a year now, and each time the assessor denies his companies liability

Also, if I go to court and lose, what will I have to pay - the MSE guide isn't very clear on costs if I lose.

Many thanks.

Cameron1590_2

Hi,

The LA have a legal duty to maintain the highway and ensure that it does not cause damage or injury to those using it or their property.

Section 58 of this highways act 1980 allows the LA a number of defences should a claim arise, should a claim arise and the LA are represented in front of a court. The court are required to consider:

If the LA knew or were expected to know about the defect.
If the repair was carried out to a reasonable standard.
How an average person would expect to find the condition of the part of highway in question and if the condition was to a reasonable standard.
The type of traffic and volume that Road could be expected to carry.

If you are certain you can prove that it's the same pothole then you could have a case at court. The LA have a legal duty to inspect roads however it depends on the category of the road as to how often they should be inspected.

If the inspector finds an urgent defect and it is temporarily patched then the LA must inspect that section of road more then they normally would to ensure the repair remains safe until a permanent repair is carried out.

I hope this helps you out a little. If you have any questions let me know. I work in highways so can always find the awnser if I don't know it.


Thanks