Car damage - can I claim against the council?

Robisere

No

One fact is inescapable:

Your car appears to be written off and your insurer will pay you a sum in settlement.

The same procedure that would have happened in the event of a collision, from an RTC, which would have the same effect. Did you suffer any other loss or injury from the incident? If not, there is no way that you will be able to obtain anything further.

Car_54

No

IanMSpencer wrote: »

Well, as I said at the top of the thread, I wasn't overly sympathetic, but I think the damning of someone without understanding the actual circumstances is inappropriate - in this case, the driver did not realise they were about to drive through a flood, (a big difference between blindly wading through an obvious flood and being confused as to what lay on the road ahead in terms of culpability) and it is appropriate at least to consider that if other people had also been caught out, there might be something about how that problem appeared from a driver's point of view that does not require the unhelpful sarcasm being dished out - ah, I forgot I was on MSE for a moment, my mistake.

If you were driving in the dark, on an unfamiliar road on the side of the hill, where there were no warning signs, and you didn't know the road dipped, are you sure that you would properly translate what you saw into a car-writing off flood (and I say this as someone who will stop for a puddle at the side of the road that others might drive through)? If the surrounding area was not flooded, would you expect there to be a flood to assess?

By the OP's own account (post #7) he saw the flood water, but carried on regardless.

Which part of my post (if any) do you consider to be sarcastic?

AndyMc.....

No

Robisere wrote: »

One fact is inescapable:

Your car appears to be written off and your insurer will pay you a sum in settlement.

The same procedure that would have happened in the event of a collision, from an RTC, which would have the same effect. Did you suffer any other loss or injury from the incident? If not, there is no way that you will be able to obtain anything further.

Highly unlikely there’d be any injury pay out.

AdrianC

IanMSpencer wrote: »

Well, as I said at the top of the thread, I wasn't overly sympathetic, but I think the damning of someone without understanding the actual circumstances is inappropriate - in this case, the driver did not realise they were about to drive through a flood, (a big difference between blindly wading through an obvious flood and being confused as to what lay on the road ahead in terms of culpability) and it is appropriate at least to consider that if other people had also been caught out, there might be something about how that problem appeared from a driver's point of view that does not require the unhelpful sarcasm being dished out - ah, I forgot I was on MSE for a moment, my mistake.

If you were driving in the dark, on an unfamiliar road on the side of the hill, where there were no warning signs, and you didn't know the road dipped, are you sure that you would properly translate what you saw into a car-writing off flood (and I say this as someone who will stop for a puddle at the side of the road that others might drive through)? If the surrounding area was not flooded, would you expect there to be a flood to assess?

Wouldn't it be nice to have a Streetview link to the location in question...?

I don't think I've ever once seen a dip in the road surface that wasn't utterly apparent from the surroundings at the side of the road.

Richard53

No

It's very welcome that the insurers are going to make a total loss payment (if indeed they are). ISTR at the time of the last floods there were several stories of motorists whose insurers deemed that they had entered the water recklessly (given that it was obvious that the road was flooded) and either refused to pay out, or gave a drastically reduced sum. If I were the OP, I would be making sure of my insurance payout before I started pursuing anyone else.

LeafGreen

I'm having similar thoughts to Richard53 - my fear is that this type of incident will not be covered by a standard motor insurance policy. Who are you with? Strange if they did not say anything when you reported the circumstances. If they do pay out, consider it a very lucky escape!

Also I'm curious as to what you might wish to claim for on top of the damage to the car?

AdrianC

It'll be covered. It's no different to driving into any other stationary object.

facade

No

AdrianC wrote: »

I don't think I've ever once seen a dip in the road surface that wasn't utterly apparent from the surroundings at the side of the road.

Come and visit sunny Walsall then..

https://farm8.staticflickr.co/7231/14055078444_0bb83b951f_b.jpg


Or as the link is unlikely to work,
N 52 34' 59.04" W 1 59' 10.12" are the GPS co-ordinates


It used to flood regularly completely level with the approach on both sides, so that the water level was at kerb depth all the way along, and about 4 foot deep under the bridge.

If you weren't a local and came zooming along at 30mph..........

There used to be an automatic illuminated "Flooded" sign once as I recall

AdrianC

AdrianC wrote:

I don't think I've ever once seen a dip in the road surface that wasn't utterly apparent from the surroundings at the side of the road.

You mean here? https://goo.gl/maps/apWAdwTSLn52

There's a rather unsubtle clue as to the dip there - just look at the way the pavement is level, and the retaining walls dip down. And that's without thinking "Oooh, I bet the road dips down to go under that railway line"

At 30mph, with a junction and a bend, you've got plenty of time to twig that.

facade

No

The road used to flood so there was no retaining wall visible. It doesn't flood quite so deep now. As a kid I watched a couple of cars get recovered from the middle. We still get the odd car drive into the canal basin mistaking it for an empty carpark too.

As you'd no doubt suggest, you'd think the completely empty carpark on one side of the road versus the well nigh full one on the other would raise some suspicion, but if people actually looked where they were going, and thought about what they were doing there wouldn't be any accidents.......