Council claiming for damage to road!
Discussion
Counterclaiming for badger control wasnt a serious comment and I wouldnt expect anyone with half a brain to take it serious.
The council is not entitled to claim of thw motorcyclists insurance as he wasnt negligent. A badger ran across the road and he hit it and spilled oil/coolant. Was he negligent?
I have suffered from several stone chips and cracks and on one occassion where there was just a truck in front of me, I knew who flipped it up. Should I be allowed to claim off the trucks insurance?
http://youtu.be/cZAjJ-g0UDw
Watch this video (at 0:35) and tell me how any cyclist or even motorist can plan for this. To have a claim made against you for an incident which you had absolutely no control over in which you could have lost your life is rubbing salt into an injury.
With this experience, the rider and people he tells his story too are more than likely to leave the scene of a similar incident because they fear they may be further penalised.
The council is not entitled to claim of thw motorcyclists insurance as he wasnt negligent. A badger ran across the road and he hit it and spilled oil/coolant. Was he negligent?
I have suffered from several stone chips and cracks and on one occassion where there was just a truck in front of me, I knew who flipped it up. Should I be allowed to claim off the trucks insurance?
http://youtu.be/cZAjJ-g0UDw
Watch this video (at 0:35) and tell me how any cyclist or even motorist can plan for this. To have a claim made against you for an incident which you had absolutely no control over in which you could have lost your life is rubbing salt into an injury.
With this experience, the rider and people he tells his story too are more than likely to leave the scene of a similar incident because they fear they may be further penalised.
rs1952 said:
Eclassy said:
I say fight it, No negligence can be proven. If they take it to court, I would counter claim against the council for not controlling the badger population.
OP - take this advice if you like - if your friend's bank balance can cover the court costs 
speedyguy said:
If you hit the "old" central res on a motorway the biggest part of the bill will probably be traffic management costs for closures, less likely now with the lovely new concrete central reservations that don't "bend"as easily 
Always amazes me that in this country if there is need to repair/replace the Armco then it involves miles and miles of lane closures for an inordinate amount of time., Whereas in France for example a couple of lorries roll up from either direction with big feck-off arrows and flashing lights on the back and a small gang of men get out and get the job done in no time at all.BB
John145, the oil was spilt as he skidded to a halt after hitting the animal, a 1300cc engine pumps a large quantity of oil at high pressure, enough to empty the crankcase in seconds.
He did the responsible thing by informing the Police immediately then remained at the scene to ensure no following vehicles skidded on the oil.
He did the responsible thing by informing the Police immediately then remained at the scene to ensure no following vehicles skidded on the oil.
wait what so eclassy's world the insurance wont pay out for the bike either, as no negligence was proven?
anyway, this is what insurance is for, thats the point to over you for unforeseen events? if you crashed and took out a some road furniture they would be entitled to recover repair cost from you, why not to clean up an oil spill.
Its not the council who had an accident, their not at fault and should be put back in the position they were before the incident.
edit to add, all credit to the OP's friend for being responsible and doing the right thing.
Andy
anyway, this is what insurance is for, thats the point to over you for unforeseen events? if you crashed and took out a some road furniture they would be entitled to recover repair cost from you, why not to clean up an oil spill.
Its not the council who had an accident, their not at fault and should be put back in the position they were before the incident.
edit to add, all credit to the OP's friend for being responsible and doing the right thing.
Andy
Edited by TheConverted on Thursday 16th October 09:54
TheConverted said:
wait what so eclassy's world the insurance wont pay out for the bike either, as no negligence was proven?
He insured his bike for comp cover, so that includes accidental damage. Cover is in place, negligence or not. But a third party normally has to show negligence in order to claim against someone.The two things are entirely different.
Eclassy said:
Counterclaiming for badger control wasnt a serious comment and I wouldnt expect anyone with half a brain to take it serious.
The council is not entitled to claim of thw motorcyclists insurance as he wasnt negligent. A badger ran across the road and he hit it and spilled oil/coolant. Was he negligent?
I have suffered from several stone chips and cracks and on one occassion where there was just a truck in front of me, I knew who flipped it up. Should I be allowed to claim off the trucks insurance?
http://youtu.be/cZAjJ-g0UDw
Watch this video (at 0:35) and tell me how any cyclist or even motorist can plan for this. To have a claim made against you for an incident which you had absolutely no control over in which you could have lost your life is rubbing salt into an injury.
With this experience, the rider and people he tells his story too are more than likely to leave the scene of a similar incident because they fear they may be further penalised.
I didn't comment on the badger issue - it was simply the second part of the sentence I quoted. And besides, the Council wouldn't be responsible for controlling the badger population anyway - that would be down to DEFRA and the owners of the land upon which they have their setts The council is not entitled to claim of thw motorcyclists insurance as he wasnt negligent. A badger ran across the road and he hit it and spilled oil/coolant. Was he negligent?
I have suffered from several stone chips and cracks and on one occassion where there was just a truck in front of me, I knew who flipped it up. Should I be allowed to claim off the trucks insurance?
http://youtu.be/cZAjJ-g0UDw
Watch this video (at 0:35) and tell me how any cyclist or even motorist can plan for this. To have a claim made against you for an incident which you had absolutely no control over in which you could have lost your life is rubbing salt into an injury.
With this experience, the rider and people he tells his story too are more than likely to leave the scene of a similar incident because they fear they may be further penalised.
When you state: "The council is not entitled to claim of the motorcyclists insurance as he wasn't negligent" you are talking complete and absolute bullshyte, and presumably from a position of ignorance. As other posters have also pointed out, insurance companies do not need to prove negligence to pursue a successful claim - if, for example, a tree in your next door neighbour's garden blew down in a storm and demolished your garage, would you be happy to rebuild the thing at your own expense because your next door neighbour wasn't negligent? Thought not
This is the way the real world works - it might not be the way you think it ought to work, but that's another matter.
The term "barrack room lawyer" springs to mind
Corpulent Tosser said:
You would risk being taken to court for negligence, which could potentially be causing death through negligence.
There was a case in NE Scotland quite recently where a mobile crane leaked oil and a mother and two children were killed after skidding on the oil.
The driver and company were prosecuted for failing to maintain the vehicle, if you knowingly left spilt oil on the highway you would leave yourself open to such a prosecution.
In addition to being stupid/irresponsible.
Quite, but is charging people (or claiming from their insurance), who spill oil on the carriageway, and then bring this to the attention of the authorities going to encourage or discourage reporting?There was a case in NE Scotland quite recently where a mobile crane leaked oil and a mother and two children were killed after skidding on the oil.
The driver and company were prosecuted for failing to maintain the vehicle, if you knowingly left spilt oil on the highway you would leave yourself open to such a prosecution.
In addition to being stupid/irresponsible.
rs1952 said:
As other posters have also pointed out, insurance companies do not need to prove negligence to pursue a successful claim - if, for example, a tree in your next door neighbour's garden blew down in a storm and demolished your garage, would you be happy to rebuild the thing at your own expense because your next door neighbour wasn't negligent? Thought not
This is the way the real world works - it might not be the way you think it ought to work, but that's another matter.
The term "barrack room lawyer" springs to mind
Just reposted for posterity. And for when Loon turns up... I'm not sure he'd agree to be honest.This is the way the real world works - it might not be the way you think it ought to work, but that's another matter.
The term "barrack room lawyer" springs to mind
Retroman said:
I would decline providing them with my insurance details due to not being negligent.
I'd point out should they decide to try and take you to court, they would need to prove negligence before you can be found liable.
Usually, but with some exceptions. The NHS can bill an emergency treatment fee for attending an RTA, which is payable by law regardless of negligence. I don't know if the Highways Agency have a similar dispensation, but they may have.I'd point out should they decide to try and take you to court, they would need to prove negligence before you can be found liable.
Either way, declining to give insurance details is bad advice. Do the opposite. Give insurance details and let them handle it. That's what you pay for. If they think you aren't liable in law to pay, then they will repudiate the claim. If they think you are, they will.
There are two potential issues here.
Is the biker liable to the Council in negligence? Absolutely not in my view.
However, following the accident, does he have a statutory duty to clean up the oil (or more likely, contract someone to do so?) If so, and the Council provided that service to him, then they have the same right to charge him as an emergency plumber unblocking a drain would (or alternatively by some statutory, non-contractual mechanism).
I'm not clear as to what the position is in terms of statutory duty but it is too simplistic to look at this solely in terms of common law negligence.
Is the biker liable to the Council in negligence? Absolutely not in my view.
However, following the accident, does he have a statutory duty to clean up the oil (or more likely, contract someone to do so?) If so, and the Council provided that service to him, then they have the same right to charge him as an emergency plumber unblocking a drain would (or alternatively by some statutory, non-contractual mechanism).
I'm not clear as to what the position is in terms of statutory duty but it is too simplistic to look at this solely in terms of common law negligence.
kev b said:
He did the responsible thing by informing the Police immediately then remained at the scene to ensure no following vehicles skidded on the oil.
So he did the responsible thing and called the police, so as not to cause another accident. Good on him, many wouldn't have bothered. I'm not sure why doing what you should do anyway, would make you any less responsible for the accident though. If he had then hit a parked car, would he have also not been reasonable for that? I'm not sure why so many people take a claim against there insurance as a personal insult.
CYMR0 said:
There are two potential issues here.
Is the biker liable to the Council in negligence? Absolutely not in my view.
However, following the accident, does he have a statutory duty to clean up the oil (or more likely, contract someone to do so?) If so, and the Council provided that service to him, then they have the same right to charge him as an emergency plumber unblocking a drain would (or alternatively by some statutory, non-contractual mechanism).
I'm not clear as to what the position is in terms of statutory duty but it is too simplistic to look at this solely in terms of common law negligence.
Exactly right. If we take as read he wasn't negligent in the accident, if a car had come along 20 seconds later, hit the oil and crashed, I doubt the car driver could claim off the bike owner. But the bike owner still has a duty to clear up the mess, and not having the tools and equipment to do that himself, someone else did it for him. Therefore he (or the insurer) has to pay for that service.Is the biker liable to the Council in negligence? Absolutely not in my view.
However, following the accident, does he have a statutory duty to clean up the oil (or more likely, contract someone to do so?) If so, and the Council provided that service to him, then they have the same right to charge him as an emergency plumber unblocking a drain would (or alternatively by some statutory, non-contractual mechanism).
I'm not clear as to what the position is in terms of statutory duty but it is too simplistic to look at this solely in terms of common law negligence.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Exactly right. If we take as read he wasn't negligent in the accident, if a car had come along 20 seconds later, hit the oil and crashed, I doubt the car driver could claim off the bike owner. But the bike owner still has a duty to clear up the mess, and not having the tools and equipment to do that himself, someone else did it for him. Therefore he (or the insurer) has to pay for that service.
I just had a scary thought. 
Imagine, if a car came round the corner and slid on the motorbike oil, then almost collided with a pedal cyclist coming in the opposite direction just as he was running a stop sign, causing him to fall off his bike.
The resulting thread would run for ever, whilst PH’s finest ‘must have the last word’ aficionado’s contemplated how to assign blame to anyone/everyone else apart from their own peer-group.
300 pages of casual insults easy….
Lucky for us, it never happened, as the OP had a consience and did the right thing.
Even if he is getting put on as a result.
rs1952 said:
When you state: "The council is not entitled to claim of the motorcyclists insurance as he wasn't negligent" you are talking complete and absolute bullshyte, and presumably from a position of ignorance. As other posters have also pointed out, insurance companies do not need to prove negligence to pursue a successful claim - if, for example, a tree in your next door neighbour's garden blew down in a storm and demolished your garage, would you be happy to rebuild the thing at your own expense because your next door neighbour wasn't negligent? Thought not
This is the way the real world works - it might not be the way you think it ought to work, but that's another matter.
The term "barrack room lawyer" springs to mind
I wouldnt be happy but sadly I would have to pay for the damage myself or more sensibly claim off my home insurance.This is the way the real world works - it might not be the way you think it ought to work, but that's another matter.
The term "barrack room lawyer" springs to mind
Its the same way I cant claim of a truck's insurance for flipping up a stone and cracking my windscreen. I remember reading on here about a chap whose car was damaged by part of a truvk's tyre that detached on the motorway... He got zilch
Funny thing is I used to think like you but I was schooled by the barrack room lawyers here on PH.
rs1952 said:
if, for example, a tree in your next door neighbour's garden blew down in a storm and demolished your garage, would you be happy to rebuild the thing at your own expense because your next door neighbour wasn't negligent?
No, I'd get my own insurers to rebuild it. I certainly wouldn't be able to claim off my neighbour, unless the tree was in a dangerous state before blowing down and he'd been warned about it.This isn't complex law, it's pretty basic stuff.
kev b said:
John145, the oil was spilt as he skidded to a halt after hitting the animal, a 1300cc engine pumps a large quantity of oil at high pressure, enough to empty the crankcase in seconds.
He did the responsible thing by informing the Police immediately then remained at the scene to ensure no following vehicles skidded on the oil.
Sorry I read it as he hit it but just carried on going.He did the responsible thing by informing the Police immediately then remained at the scene to ensure no following vehicles skidded on the oil.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff