Builders damaged pavements - liability

EachPenny

Davesnave wrote: »

The waters have been cleared. You're muddying them again!

I don't think the waters are quite as clear as they seem. There are actions the highway authority can take to recover the cost of repairs. Hence my question about whether the OP had to apply for planning consent.

Furts wrote: »

Then there are the footpaths - these should be constructed to take reasonable use. Plus vehicle crossovers should be built stronger. Hence any damage could be a result of poor footpath building. It follows that this is a Council problem.

The footways will be constructed to take the loads imposed by normal use - which as they are the 'part of the highway reserved for pedestrians' would normally be pedestrian loading. Vehicle crossovers will generally be constructed to take loadings from normal cars and light vans.

Loading from lorry wheels requires a much higher standard of construction. Loading from stabilisers (cranes/hiabs/skip lorries) is then a special case - the surface is not protected by the flexibility of rubber tyres transmitting the load over a relatively large area - the stabiliser is a point load, and without adequate load spreading could even damage the road surface.

Many councils specify that standard vehicle crossovers cannot be used by lorries, and many councils have conditions on the use of builders skips which try to prevent the skip lorry from crossing the footway or using stabilisers without adequate load-spreading.

If your lorry causes damage to the footway then it is not the council's fault - even if the footway is poorly constructed.

Davesnave

Furts wrote: »

An easy answer is to act ignorant, and hope nothing ever gets said.

In the face of the complex answers being given, I think that's probably the conclusion many might come to!

An home extension is a complex enough matter for the uninitiated to undertake, without also having to plan for the random actions of those they may not have employed directly.

By all means pick it up with the council later, but my advice right now is to focus your eagle eyes on the build.

Davesnave

EachPenny wrote: »

If your lorry causes damage to the footway then it is not the council's fault - even if the footway is poorly constructed.

Is it the OP's lorry?

Ganga

Would it not be best to point out to the builder that " one of your lorries/delivery lorries has cracked the pavement " and they maywant to repair it themselves rather than the cost the council will pass on?

moneyistooshorttomention

Ganga wrote: »

Would it not be best to point out to the builder that " one of your lorries/delivery lorries has cracked the pavement " and they maywant to repair it themselves rather than the cost the council will pass on?

Rather doubtful imo....and I would interpret any move by the company to say this as translating into "Can we please try and bodge it ourselves?" and the answer is obvious to that one.

Even if they "repaired it themselves" I very much doubt whether it would be done to a normal standard (ie because it's hardly going to be one of their "things they normally do" and are experienced/trained in).

moneyistooshorttomention

Davesnave wrote: »

In the face of the complex answers being given, I think that's probably the conclusion many might come to!

An home extension is a complex enough matter for the uninitiated to undertake, without also having to plan for the random actions of those they may not have employed directly.

By all means pick it up with the council later, but my advice right now is to focus your eagle eyes on the build.

I can understand the logic of that - but (darn and double darn) having work done on the house always seems to be more blimmin' hassle than anticipated. One of the reasons being that one has to allow for firms not fulfilling their responsibilities towards other peoples property and one has to make them do so:mad:

It's the way things are - darn it - in my experience:(

It's called "being responsible oneself". Otherwise known as being able to show you've been "whiter than white" if anyone else (neighbours/the Council/etc) start "having a go"....whatever anyone else has been up to....

AndyMc.....

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Rather doubtful imo....and I would interpret any move by the company to say this as translating into "Can we please try and bodge it ourselves?" and the answer is obvious to that one.

Even if they "repaired it themselves" I very much doubt whether it would be done to a normal standard (ie because it's hardly going to be one of their "things they normally do" and are experienced/trained in).

Replacing a few slabs is hardly specialised work.

Furts

AndyMc..... wrote: »

Replacing a few slabs is hardly specialised work.

Plus typical council slabs are 600x600x50 grey hydraulically pressed - cheap as chips. Some older ones will be 900x600 which are really heavy beasts, but again they are available. Only if they are natural stone, or conservation slabs, do matters become a bit more difficult.

The pragmatic answer to OP is to pay the builders to replace the slabs and then say nowt to anyone about the whys and whens.

EachPenny

Davesnave wrote: »

Is it the OP's lorry?

I was using 'your' in the context of Furts post (i.e. the owner/operator/person responsible for the lorry being there) rather than the OP as the householder. Not that being the householder lets you get away with damaging the council's footway by having lorries delivering to your site - councils can and do recover their costs from householders, regardless of whether it was 'their' lorry which caused the damage. It is a complex situation and varies between authorities.

Ganga wrote: »

Would it not be best to point out to the builder that " one of your lorries/delivery lorries has cracked the pavement " and they maywant to repair it themselves rather than the cost the council will pass on?

Carrying out (repair) work on the public highway is technically an offence unless you have a license/permission from the authority, or you are one of the statutory undertakers (or a person working on their behalf). Asking a builder to repair the damage to the footway could lead to a bigger bill from the council.

AndyMc..... wrote: »

Replacing a few slabs is hardly specialised work.

Agreed, and inexplicable how so many contractors and builders do simple repairs so badly. Getting the slabs laid level and flush, and bedded so they will stay there in future, does require quite a bit of skill.

Furts wrote: »

The pragmatic answer to OP is to pay the builders to replace the slabs and then say nowt to anyone about the whys and whens.

The OP might get away with it, but might not. It depends in part whether they had to apply for planning permission for the work. I suspect we may never know

AndyMc.....

EachPenny wrote: »

I was using 'your' in the context of Furts post (i.e. the owner/operator/person responsible for the lorry being there) rather than the OP as the householder. Not that being the householder lets you get away with damaging the council's footway by having lorries delivering to your site - councils can and do recover their costs from householders, regardless of whether it was 'their' lorry which caused the damage. It is a complex situation and varies between authorities.



Carrying out (repair) work on the public highway is technically an offence unless you have a license/permission from the authority, or you are one of the statutory undertakers (or a person working on their behalf). Asking a builder to repair the damage to the footway could lead to a bigger bill from the council.



Agreed, and inexplicable how so many contractors and builders do simple repairs so badly. Getting the slabs laid level and flush, and bedded so they will stay there in future, does require quite a bit of skill.



The OP might get away with it, but might not. It depends in part whether they had to apply for planning permission for the work. I suspect we may never know

Any mildly competent diyer could do it. The other slabs will determine the level and those slabs and gravity will stop the wandering off.