Protruding Kerb stone damage to car!

paragp

Hi there

Hopefully someone can help here.

On the 28th of July, whilst coming to park the car, the front left tyre and wheel were damaged do to the kerb stone sticking out. I had they tyre replaced and started a claim against the local council.

The issue with the kerb was due to tree roots pushing out the kerb stone.

Soon after the claim was logged (1st Aug 2018), an inspector from from the local highways dept came to inspect the kerb. He said yes its bad and will need to be fixed/replaced.

I also had letter from the council acknowledging the claim and that there will be response in 90 days.

I had not heard anything from them, hence I chased then up today and I got a letter (via email) stating "XXXXX Council operates a system of regular inspections and maintenance. In regards to your claim, the Council
hold a Section 58 defence under the Highways Act 1980. This road is inspected annually. Prior to this incident, the
road was last inspected on 18th July 2018, at which time no actionable defects were noted at the incident
location. Furthermore, we were not made aware of this defect until 31 st July 2018. We inspected on 31 st July 2018
and repairs have been ordered as low priority."

In actual fact I had reported this earlier in the year but they don't see, to have any record of it.

My question is what does this mean ?
" at which time no actionable defects were noted at the incident
location"

What actually constitutes an actionable defect when it comes to kerb stones.

The defect has been there for quite a while and I have pictures showing the defect from months before the incident.

Do I have any recourse on this ?

I am attaching the picture of the kerb in question..

https://ibb.co/dSNJvA
Any advice greatly appreciated.

thank you

Aylesbury_Duck

paragp wrote: »

Hi there

Hopefully someone can help here.

On the 28th of July, whilst coming to park the car, the front left tyre and wheel were damaged do to the kerb stone sticking out. I had they tyre replaced and started a claim against the local council.

The issue with the kerb was due to tree roots pushing out the kerb stone.

Soon after the claim was logged (1st Aug 2018), an inspector from from the local highways dept came to inspect the kerb. He said yes its bad and will need to be fixed/replaced.

I also had letter from the council acknowledging the claim and that there will be response in 90 days.

I had not heard anything from them, hence I chased then up today and I got a letter (via email) stating "XXXXX Council operates a system of regular inspections and maintenance. In regards to your claim, the Council
hold a Section 58 defence under the Highways Act 1980. This road is inspected annually. Prior to this incident, the
road was last inspected on 18th July 2018, at which time no actionable defects were noted at the incident
location. Furthermore, we were not made aware of this defect until 31 st July 2018. We inspected on 31 st July 2018
and repairs have been ordered as low priority."

In actual fact I had reported this earlier in the year but they don't see, to have any record of it.

My question is what does this mean ?
" at which time no actionable defects were noted at the incident
location"

What actually constitutes an actionable defect when it comes to kerb stones.

The defect has been there for quite a while and I have pictures showing the defect from months before the incident.

Do I have any recourse on this ?

I am attaching the picture of the kerb in question..



Any advice greatly appreciated.

thank you

Is that it? I can't see how they would pay out for that. It doesn't look actionable to me and as their report suggests, it would be a low priority repair. It isn't reasonable to expect them to maintain a perfect straight line. I'm surprised you caused any serious damage parking against that, the protrusion is minimal.

stator

Do you have records of when you informed tham about it?
If so you might have a claim

paragp

Aylesbury_Duck wrote: »

Is that it? I can't see how they would pay out for that. It doesn't look actionable to me and as their report suggests, it would be a low priority repair. It isn't reasonable to expect them to maintain a perfect straight line. I'm surprised you caused any serious damage parking against that, the protrusion is minimal.

Maybe that picture does not depict it properly, but that protrusion is is about 1 1/2 inches from from the other kerb with is also protruding due the the roots.

paragp

stator wrote: »

Do you have records of when you informed tham about it?
If so you might have a claim

The only record I have is when I reported it again in July, the one before i never got a reference for.

chrisw

You reported it twice so you were well aware of it but still hit it???

martinthebandit

Aylesbury_Duck wrote: »

Is that it? I can't see how they would pay out for that. It doesn't look actionable to me and as their report suggests, it would be a low priority repair. It isn't reasonable to expect them to maintain a perfect straight line. I'm surprised you caused any serious damage parking against that, the protrusion is minimal.

This ^

Are you really trying to say it's the Councils fault that you damaged your car on that?


:rotfl:

unholyangel

The council are indeed only liable if they were negligent - this usually means that it was reported to them, they failed to repair it within reasonable time and it would be obvious that such a thing would cause damage/danger to road users.

Im sorry to point this out but if you yourself reported it earlier in the year then you'll likely be looking at contributory negligence at best or your sole liability at worst.

Aylesbury_Duck

paragp wrote: »

Maybe that picture does not depict it properly, but that protrusion is is about 1 1/2 inches from from the other kerb with is also protruding due the the roots.

The picture is fine then. Even a 2-inch protrusion is small.

I don't think you're going to get anywhere, for three reasons:

1. It seems you reported it before the incident where you damaged your car on it, if I understand your chronology correctly. Even if you didn't report it beforehand you've admitted you knew of it "months before" yet still chose to park there.
2. I think it's reasonable that the council deemed it a low-priority repair and therefore that not fixing it in a few months is fine.
3. To cause damage to the extent where you needed a new tyre and the wheel is damaged there must be some contributory negligence there. Parking is usually a low-speed manoeuvre and we've all had to try again or straighten up when we've heard and felt our tyre meet the kerb. I can only think that you gave the kerb quite a clout to be able to cause the damage you've described.

Not what you want to hear I'm sure, but that's my assessment of it.

custardy

Come on. Be serious

Scrapit

I hate it when I curb my wheels too. I don't try blaming anyone else though.