Dropped kerb laws - no longer need council to do it?

longwalks1

I looked into a dropped kerb a couple of years ago when we moved, but it came back at about £1300 all in, to widen an exisiting dropped kerb by another 2 kerbstones.

Im sure i saw somewhere that you no longer have to use 'council approved' contractors to do the work, is this true? If so, im assuming the price may of come down a bit if it has

AndyMc.....

britishboy wrote: »

I looked into a dropped kerb a couple of years ago when we moved, but it came back at about £1300 all in, to widen an exisiting dropped kerb by another 2 kerbstones.

Im sure i saw somewhere that you no longer have to use 'council approved' contractors to do the work, is this true? If so, im assuming the price may of come down a bit if it has

I can’t see the council allowing anyone who isn’t approve loose on the highway.

Mojisola

britishboy wrote: »

Im sure i saw somewhere that you no longer have to use 'council approved' contractors to do the work, is this true? If so, im assuming the price may of come down a bit if it has

Check your council’s website - what you’ve read is wrong.

EachPenny

britishboy wrote: »

Im sure i saw somewhere that you no longer have to use 'council approved' contractors to do the work, is this true? If so, im assuming the price may of come down a bit if it has

It isn't something I've seen, and I would be surprised if it were the case as everything in the last 20 years has been moving towards more regulation of highway works rather than less. For example the most recent change has been the introduction of permitting schemes so that even contractors doing work for the council itself have to get approval in advance.

The purpose of having an approved contractor list is to ensure the contractors have the right insurances, qualifications and training, health and safety procedures and can be 'found' if anything goes wrong. Therefore scrapping that and allowing anybody to start digging up roads and pavements wouldn't seem a sensible approach to adopt in a society where people are increasingly likely to claim compensation for injury. That said, the way Government works I wouldn't rule anything out.

Furts

EachPenny wrote: »

It isn't something I've seen, and I would be surprised if it were the case as everything in the last 20 years has been moving towards more regulation of highway works rather than less. For example the most recent change has been the introduction of permitting schemes so that even contractors doing work for the council itself have to get approval in advance.

The purpose of having an approved contractor list is to ensure the contractors have the right insurances, qualifications and training, health and safety procedures and can be 'found' if anything goes wrong. Therefore scrapping that and allowing anybody to start digging up roads and pavements wouldn't seem a sensible approach to adopt in a society where people are increasingly likely to claim compensation for injury. That said, the way Government works I wouldn't rule anything out.

The only flaw with the system is does each Council have the person(s) with the skills to monitor the contractors? Staff levels generally have fallen at alarming rates.

It is all a bit like the self certification schemes for Buildings Regulations. No substitute for the proper regime that once existed.

teneighty

Recently had a job in Wiltshire, the council only ask for contractor to have £5 million public liability insurance and street works accreditation. That covers most tarmac contractors.

stator

You can get another contractor to do the work, but most councils will charge you a large fee for permission to do the work, and often it ends up being cheaper paying the council to do the work (they waive the permission fee if you pay them to do the work)

EachPenny

Furts wrote: »

The only flaw with the system is does each Council have the person(s) with the skills to monitor the contractors? Staff levels generally have fallen at alarming rates.

I agree, most local authorities don't see supervision of works as a priority and end up picking up the cost of defective works. Permit schemes were supposed to generate an income to allow the authorities to employ more inspectors, but in reality the head of finance has just absorbed the income to offset other service funding reductions.

stator wrote: »

You can get another contractor to do the work, but most councils will charge you a large fee for permission to do the work, and often it ends up being cheaper paying the council to do the work (they waive the permission fee if you pay them to do the work)

The approach varies widely between councils, some will not authorise any contractor but their own to do crossovers.