Council refuses to pay towards our broken tyre / wheel. Help
Discussion
Back in April the Mrs hit a pothole on the way to pick up one of the kids. The impact destroyed the tyre and buckled the wheel. Having a look at the road, the pothole had not been circled in paint, and was a result of the tarmac breaking up and exposing a cats-eye.
We got the car recovered and the next day complained to the council.
After several months the council have simply said that it is not their problem
Does the council have the last word in this issue, or can we take things further?
I've scanned in the council's letter and it can be found here - http://dafyddhughesphotography.co.uk/wp-content/up...
Thanks in advance,
Dav
We got the car recovered and the next day complained to the council.
After several months the council have simply said that it is not their problem
Does the council have the last word in this issue, or can we take things further?
I've scanned in the council's letter and it can be found here - http://dafyddhughesphotography.co.uk/wp-content/up...
Thanks in advance,
Dav
Have you pictures of the accident site?
If so all the better for you.
Now ask them for a log of inspections, you can have this under Data Protection Act.
I think you will know what to do if they don't disclose the above detail...
If not letter to Chief Exec saying in a better way that I'm terming it, your staff are liars and can I have my money please.
If so all the better for you.
Now ask them for a log of inspections, you can have this under Data Protection Act.
I think you will know what to do if they don't disclose the above detail...
If not letter to Chief Exec saying in a better way that I'm terming it, your staff are liars and can I have my money please.
Edited by anothernameitist on Wednesday 31st July 11:29
trails said:
Had the same issue many moons ago with a broken kerb stone and an expensive Prodrive alloy; if they can show they inspected it within the statutory period you are a hiding to nothing.
Sorry to hear that fella.Makes me sick. Thing is, IF they know a junction (such as in our case) is susceptible to continual problems, how can they inspect / repair so infrequently?
The roads are so bad in our neck of the woods that we have now got rid of the said car as we seemed to be forever replacing tyres!
Ta.
Dav
I thought the council were only libel if the road damage was actually known about?
The defence being "we cannot fix that we don't know about or routine inspection failed to spot"?
So if the road damage in question was circled or known about prior to the damage being caused then they have to pay up. However if there was no record of the damage being recorded anywhere you aren't going to get a pay-out?
The defence being "we cannot fix that we don't know about or routine inspection failed to spot"?
So if the road damage in question was circled or known about prior to the damage being caused then they have to pay up. However if there was no record of the damage being recorded anywhere you aren't going to get a pay-out?
TeaVR said:
Sorry to hear that fella.
Makes me sick. Thing is, IF they know a junction (such as in our case) is susceptible to continual problems, how can they inspect / repair so infrequently?
The roads are so bad in our neck of the woods that we have now got rid of the said car as we seemed to be forever replacing tyres!
Ta.
Dav
Yup, nothing worse than feeling like you are having your pants pulled down by local government...still any car\pot hole issues vanish into insignificance when out on a velocipede; some roads are like ploughed fields.Makes me sick. Thing is, IF they know a junction (such as in our case) is susceptible to continual problems, how can they inspect / repair so infrequently?
The roads are so bad in our neck of the woods that we have now got rid of the said car as we seemed to be forever replacing tyres!
Ta.
Dav
Stoofa said:
I thought the council were only libel if the road damage was actually known about?
The defence being "we cannot fix that we don't know about or routine inspection failed to spot"?
So if the road damage in question was circled or known about prior to the damage being caused then they have to pay up. However if there was no record of the damage being recorded anywhere you aren't going to get a pay-out?
wrong i'm afraidThe defence being "we cannot fix that we don't know about or routine inspection failed to spot"?
So if the road damage in question was circled or known about prior to the damage being caused then they have to pay up. However if there was no record of the damage being recorded anywhere you aren't going to get a pay-out?
lots of intricacies but overall its all about what's reasonable - reasonable response to reports, reasonable system of inspections (busy roads more often etc), reasonable action (scale and time)
the request for information isn't data protection or freedom of information its so op can consider whether to pursue the matter
28 day repair may be reasonable....or not - difficult to tell on info here
From the letter, you dont stand a chance, the defect was picked up before you hit it and due for repair within 28 days. It was then picked up a month later and upgraded to a Cat 1 defect due to it having deteriorated.
You can take this as high as you want but you wont get anywhere, trust me. The council have fulfilled their duty and they know it.
You can take this as high as you want but you wont get anywhere, trust me. The council have fulfilled their duty and they know it.
This may result in much flamage and gnashing of teeth but I say good.
I think it is ridiculous that people can claim from the council because they have damaged their cars. I look where I am going, drive round the potholes and buy cars with wheels not made of cheese and without rubber band tyres. Why should my council tax money go to people who buy daft unsuitable cars and then don't look where they are going? I would rather they spent the money on useful stuff that benefits everyone.
The whole concept seems like another manifestation of the total lack of personal responsibility that seems to be encouraged nowadays. Not everything is someone else's fault.
I think it is ridiculous that people can claim from the council because they have damaged their cars. I look where I am going, drive round the potholes and buy cars with wheels not made of cheese and without rubber band tyres. Why should my council tax money go to people who buy daft unsuitable cars and then don't look where they are going? I would rather they spent the money on useful stuff that benefits everyone.
The whole concept seems like another manifestation of the total lack of personal responsibility that seems to be encouraged nowadays. Not everything is someone else's fault.
They dont always circle it when they know about an issue ... for that reason ..
Stoofa said:
I thought the council were only libel if the road damage was actually known about?
The defence being "we cannot fix that we don't know about or routine inspection failed to spot"?
So if the road damage in question was circled or known about prior to the damage being caused then they have to pay up. However if there was no record of the damage being recorded anywhere you aren't going to get a pay-out?
The defence being "we cannot fix that we don't know about or routine inspection failed to spot"?
So if the road damage in question was circled or known about prior to the damage being caused then they have to pay up. However if there was no record of the damage being recorded anywhere you aren't going to get a pay-out?
chris182 said:
This may result in much flamage and gnashing of teeth but I say good.
I think it is ridiculous that people can claim from the council because they have damaged their cars. I look where I am going, drive round the potholes and buy cars with wheels not made of cheese and without rubber band tyres. Why should my council tax money go to people who buy daft unsuitable cars and then don't look where they are going? I would rather they spent the money on useful stuff that benefits everyone.
The whole concept seems like another manifestation of the total lack of personal responsibility that seems to be encouraged nowadays. Not everything is someone else's fault.
Quite agree. The roads are poor. That's no secret. Choose both car and driving style to suit.I think it is ridiculous that people can claim from the council because they have damaged their cars. I look where I am going, drive round the potholes and buy cars with wheels not made of cheese and without rubber band tyres. Why should my council tax money go to people who buy daft unsuitable cars and then don't look where they are going? I would rather they spent the money on useful stuff that benefits everyone.
The whole concept seems like another manifestation of the total lack of personal responsibility that seems to be encouraged nowadays. Not everything is someone else's fault.
chris182 said:
This may result in much flamage and gnashing of teeth but I say good.
I think it is ridiculous that people can claim from the council because they have damaged their cars. I look where I am going, drive round the potholes and buy cars with wheels not made of cheese and without rubber band tyres. Why should my council tax money go to people who buy daft unsuitable cars and then don't look where they are going? I would rather they spent the money on useful stuff that benefits everyone.
The whole concept seems like another manifestation of the total lack of personal responsibility that seems to be encouraged nowadays. Not everything is someone else's fault.
So, go tell that to those that ride motorbikes (or pedal bikes).I think it is ridiculous that people can claim from the council because they have damaged their cars. I look where I am going, drive round the potholes and buy cars with wheels not made of cheese and without rubber band tyres. Why should my council tax money go to people who buy daft unsuitable cars and then don't look where they are going? I would rather they spent the money on useful stuff that benefits everyone.
The whole concept seems like another manifestation of the total lack of personal responsibility that seems to be encouraged nowadays. Not everything is someone else's fault.
As far as avoiding potholes - I am sure most of us do. HOWEVER, this is not always possible. On numerous occasions I have braced myself seeing a pothole last minute. Choice swerve and hit an on coming car or hit the pothole.
Things are made worse at night as was the case of this incident.
I'll also add that it is not just about wheels and tyres. Think of the suspension damage! For christ sake, this is Pistonheads - are you telling everyone they should drive an XC90!?
Edited by TeaVR on Wednesday 31st July 12:20
chris182 said:
This may result in much flamage and gnashing of teeth but I say good.
I think it is ridiculous that people can claim from the council because they have damaged their cars. I look where I am going, drive round the potholes and buy cars with wheels not made of cheese and without rubber band tyres. Why should my council tax money go to people who buy daft unsuitable cars and then don't look where they are going? I would rather they spent the money on useful stuff that benefits everyone.
The whole concept seems like another manifestation of the total lack of personal responsibility that seems to be encouraged nowadays. Not everything is someone else's fault.
There are always exceptions; I tried to recover the costs of a new wheel and tyre where two kerb stones had separated from a steel expansion joint which had been pushed out into the carriage way, the colour of the steel meant it was impossible to see until you were at kerb level.I think it is ridiculous that people can claim from the council because they have damaged their cars. I look where I am going, drive round the potholes and buy cars with wheels not made of cheese and without rubber band tyres. Why should my council tax money go to people who buy daft unsuitable cars and then don't look where they are going? I would rather they spent the money on useful stuff that benefits everyone.
The whole concept seems like another manifestation of the total lack of personal responsibility that seems to be encouraged nowadays. Not everything is someone else's fault.
I have huge sympathies with the OP, but having fought and lost with both TFL and Surrey CC many times I know how much the b
ds will wriggle off the hook.
The Accord I had was on 17s with 55 profile tyres, and the potholes in my area would do 3 tyres a year and at least one wheel crack weld or total replacement. Over the 8 years I had the car from new, that was a lot of tyres...
The car got written off 4 years ago outside my house, and I replaced it with a CR-V - I have only changed 2 tyres, and that's because they were worn out.
It is right what is being said about the right car/tyres for current motoring - the councils are going to avoid repairing the roads for a long time to come, so better to mitigate the situation.
ds will wriggle off the hook.The Accord I had was on 17s with 55 profile tyres, and the potholes in my area would do 3 tyres a year and at least one wheel crack weld or total replacement. Over the 8 years I had the car from new, that was a lot of tyres...
The car got written off 4 years ago outside my house, and I replaced it with a CR-V - I have only changed 2 tyres, and that's because they were worn out.
It is right what is being said about the right car/tyres for current motoring - the councils are going to avoid repairing the roads for a long time to come, so better to mitigate the situation.
TeaVR said:
chris182 said:
This may result in much flamage and gnashing of teeth but I say good.
I think it is ridiculous that people can claim from the council because they have damaged their cars. I look where I am going, drive round the potholes and buy cars with wheels not made of cheese and without rubber band tyres. Why should my council tax money go to people who buy daft unsuitable cars and then don't look where they are going? I would rather they spent the money on useful stuff that benefits everyone.
The whole concept seems like another manifestation of the total lack of personal responsibility that seems to be encouraged nowadays. Not everything is someone else's fault.
So, go tell that to those that ride motorbikes (or pedal bikes).I think it is ridiculous that people can claim from the council because they have damaged their cars. I look where I am going, drive round the potholes and buy cars with wheels not made of cheese and without rubber band tyres. Why should my council tax money go to people who buy daft unsuitable cars and then don't look where they are going? I would rather they spent the money on useful stuff that benefits everyone.
The whole concept seems like another manifestation of the total lack of personal responsibility that seems to be encouraged nowadays. Not everything is someone else's fault.
As far as avoiding potholes - I am sure most of us do. HOWEVER, this is not always possible. On numerous occasions I have braced myself seeing a pothole last minute. Choice swerve and hit an on coming car or hit the pothole.
Things are made worse at night as was the case of this incident.
I'll also add that it is not just about wheels and tyres. Think of the suspension damage! For christ sake, this is Pistonheads - are you telling everyone they should drive an XC90!?
Edited by TeaVR on Wednesday 31st July 12:20
Am I lucky, or do I use a combination of my eyes, my judgement and my choice of wheels/tyres?
I find it hilarious how people moan about the condition of roads and then go and spec 19/20 inch wheels with super low profile tyres. Are they really that stupid?
TeaVR said:
So, go tell that to those that ride motorbikes (or pedal bikes).
I often ride a pedal bike on the road and it's never been a problem. Again, a carbon lycra special may not be appropriate for the roads people ride on, get a mountain bike and you'll have no issues.TeaVR said:
As far as avoiding potholes - I am sure most of us do. HOWEVER, this is not always possible. On numerous occasions I have braced myself seeing a pothole last minute. Choice swerve and hit an on coming car or hit the pothole.
Things are made worse at night as was the case of this incident.
I would argue that if this was the case then you were driving too fast for the conditions or too close to the car in front. It is still very much your fault that you hit the hole, not the councils.Things are made worse at night as was the case of this incident.
TeaVR said:
I'll also add that it is not just about wheels and tyres. Think of the suspension damage! For christ sake, this is Pistonheads - are you telling everyone they should drive an XC90!?
I'm suggesting no such thing but my point still stands. Don't spec blingtastic alloys and drive intelligently and almost any car will have no problems. I have driven a reasonable variety of cars on all manner of roads and only once had a pothole problem. I drove an old nova through what looked like a small innocuous puddle which turned out to contain an enormous crater which bent the steel rim and destroyed the tyre. It didn't even occur to me to claim from the council though, I broke it not them.Don't get me wrong, I think the councils have a duty to maintain the roads in good condition but not to use taxpayers money to compensate individuals for their own incompetence.
For 'pothole' replace with 'toddler' and see how some of these sentences read.
TeaVR said:
Back in April the Mrs hit a toddler on the way to pick up one of the kids. The impact destroyed the tyre and buckled the wheel. Having a look at the road, the toddler had not been circled in paint
TeaVR said:
As far as avoiding toddlers - I am sure most of us do. HOWEVER, this is not always possible. On numerous occasions I have braced myself seeing a toddler last minute. Choice swerve and hit an on coming car or hit the toddler.
Just a gentle wind-up, don't go mad. Edited by SpeckledJim on Wednesday 31st July 12:45
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff