Injured ankle on a pothole – who is responsible

discat11

Regardless of whose fault your accident was, you need to prove negligence to win at such a claim.

I.e. the controlling authority were aware of the issue before your accident and did nothing to remedy it in a reasonable amount of time.

The council have also told you a lot of nonsense -the council are responsible for the road not the sub contractor, unless of course sub contractors now bill us separately for the road rather than including it in the council tax?

A 'no win no fee firm' will quickly reject anything that isn't fairly easy for them to pursue , so it may well be worth you contacting them firstly since when/if they do reject it you will know darn well it isn't going to be any easy win since all those ambulance chasers only take easy win cases in any case.

ValiantSon

The council are responsible for maintaining the roads and they cannot fob you off by saying that they sub-contracted the work. They still have the statutory responsibility. If they sub-contract work they are responsible for ensuring that the contractor has completed the work to an acceptable standard.

BooJewels

lisyloo wrote: »

Some people come here to feel superior so I suggest you don't worry about it and ignore unhelpful replies.

I was beginning to wonder if the thread was just being frequented by 8 year old boys. I wonder what their response would be if the OP had been hit by a car, whilst crossing the road, because she'd been busy looking down at her feet looking for potential perils underfoot instead. For me, a fast moving car seems like a rather more immediate hazard than a potential defect in what should be a flat surface with a reasonable expectation that it could be reliably walked over. A deviation in the surface might be small enough to totally turn an ankle, yet hardly be visible - especially if full of water - and not even be noticeable under the wheels of a car. Especially if she has tiny size 3 feet like mine.

ValiantSon wrote:

The council are responsible for maintaining the roads and they cannot fob you off by saying that they sub-contracted the work.

That would be my understanding. My husband reminded me that the local high street was recently re-surfaced after some work on the water mains. It was an appalling finish and after a couple of days of the road being open again, the council declared the work sub-standard and made them re-do the entire surface again. So Councils do sign off on work by subbies and if they declare it finished, they then take responsibility for the resulting workmanship. If they do hold the subcontractor responsible for poor workmanship, then that's a separate matter for the council to take up with them under the terms of their contract, secondary to their primary responsibility to the public.

takman

BooJewels wrote: »

I was beginning to wonder if the thread was just being frequented by 8 year old boys. I wonder what their response would be if the OP had been hit by a car, whilst crossing the road,

I've never seen a pot hole move down the road at 30 MPH :rotfl:

BooJewels wrote: »

because she'd been busy looking down at her feet looking for potential perils underfoot instead. For me, a fast moving car seems like a rather more immediate hazard than a potential defect in what should be a flat surface with a reasonable expectation that it could be reliably walked over. A deviation in the surface might be small enough to totally turn an ankle, yet hardly be visible - especially if full of water - and not even be noticeable under the wheels of a car. Especially if she has tiny size 3 feet like mine.

I can't believe how people are making it out to be such a difficult task to look where you are going!. All they had to do was when they were standing by the site of the road take a look before they crossed.
I'm surprised how people on here function in life if they struggle so much with a basic task such as crossing the road.

thriftylass

BooJewels wrote: »

A deviation in the surface might be small enough to totally turn an ankle, yet hardly be visible - especially if full of water - and not even be noticeable under the wheels of a car. Especially if she has tiny size 3 feet like mine.

Never try and walk over a cobbled street or grass or anything. There are small invisible deviations all over the place.

I'm sorry you injured yourself but, I, too, agree with the posters who said look where you're going, look if the crossing is save and then look for cars. No ones fault.

EdGasketTheSecond

baron777red wrote: »

but i didnt expect there would be a big whole in the road, which was caused by sub standard work.

Is a 'whole' some kind of organic, environmental-friendly hole?

eschaton

If we could all claim for injuries as a result of not looking where we are going, then there would be no poor people.

This is up there with the best where people expect to be compensated for their own carelessness.

eschaton

Or just to answer the thread title:


Injured ankle on a pothole – who is responsible


YOU!

baron777red

firstly - thanks to the people who took the time to comment constructively, the advice has helped me.
i was always told if you don't have anything nice to say, say nothing. i wanted to have my post ridiculed and mocked i would have put it on facebook or twitter,

eschaton

baron777red wrote: »

firstly - thanks to the people who took the time to comment constructively, the advice has helped me.
i was always told if you don't have anything nice to say, say nothing. i wanted to have my post ridiculed and mocked i would have put it on facebook or twitter,

That's what happens when you don't look where you are going and then somehow think you can claim against someone else for your own mistake.

Some people really do amaze me these days.