Fragile bridge- signs and liability?

davidmcn

sandspider2000 said:

I haven't spoken to insurers yet, I don't want to make it formal.

But presumably you'd still want them to pay out if something happened?

I could put 3 tons max on the sign, though that's a guess really.

You said you've had a structural engineer look at - what is their opinion?

I just want people to be careful on it and to be aware it may be a bit weak...

Yes, but what specifically do you expect them to do (other than pay attention to a weight limit, if you specify one)? Drive extra slowly? Drive extra quickly? Listen out for cracking sounds and be ready to jump?

AdrianC

Sticking a sign up saying "3.5t GVW max" would probably be a sensible limit. That'll cover all courier vans etc, but anything doing bigger deliveries can go around.

Does the sign make you more or less liable? I can't see it increasing liability. If you were worried about imminent collapse, you should close it NOW to everything. But, since you've already had an engineer look at it, you're really just trying to slow down issues until after weather conditions allow repair.

Mutton_Geoff

sandspider2000 said:

I'd hope that heavy vehicles would turn around and go the other way!

Good luck with that. I live on a public road with this sign which is totally ignored leading to road blocks, surface damage etc etc.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.6909437,-0.6337305,3a,37.5y,69.49h,82.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shCKYvTSKbehaqa__Ix-gpQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

theoretica

Have you spoken to your neighbours?  Because if there is a bill coming up giving them time to get used to the idea would seem nicer than just hitting them with it, and it will be much easier if they tell the oil companies, or whatever, to take the other route rather than just leaving it drivers coming along and seeing the sign.

davidmcn

Mutton_Geoff said:

sandspider2000 said:

I'd hope that heavy vehicles would turn around and go the other way!

Good luck with that. I live on a public road with this sign which is totally ignored leading to road blocks, surface damage etc etc.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.6909437,-0.6337305,3a,37.5y,69.49h,82.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shCKYvTSKbehaqa__Ix-gpQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

It's not clear from the OP whether the other properties who use the bridge have a right to do so, but if not, presumably the bridge could simply be closed and that would save any further worry? A public road/right of way is a different matter (to some extent).

AdrianC

Indeed a public road is different - it is a legal RoW for every vehicle up to 38t, 16.5m long unless there are actual enforceable restrictions in place.

"Unsuitable" is not a restriction. It's advice. The colour and shape tell us this. We all know this from the highway code, right...?
I drove along an "unsuitable for motor vehicles" road this morning. It wasn't wrong - a normal 2wd car wouldn't have got through. But it was perfectly legal for me to drive along it...

The OP's bridge is not a public RoW. Nobody has a right to drive over it unless they have an explicit right of way through their ownership of one of the other properties. Anybody else needs permission from the landowner. That permission may be implicit for people providing services, such as the postie or a courier. Putting a sign there with a weight limit removes that implicit permission for vehicles above that limit.

ProDave

What are your obligations in providing this bridge and access route?

If you "closed" it or put a weight limit on, will ALL the other houses still have vehicular access by an alternative route withour restrictions or will there be weight or size limits on the other route?

Is the alternative route a public right of way or another private road?

What do their deeds say about access over your bridge?

sandspider2000

The neighbours are aware that it's weak and that there is likely to be a (shared) cost to fix it.

All houses have unlimited weight access via the other route, but I don't want to close the bridge unless I have to.

Will check my deeds re neighbour access, but as far as I remember it's a fairly vague clause about shared access and shared maintenance.

greyteam1959

1m high & 1m wide ??
Probably be cheaper to put some large pipes in & make a decent roadway over them.