Council road boss claims for car damage and told to go away
Council road boss claims for car damage and told to go away
Author
Discussion

saaby93

Original Poster:

32,038 posts

208 months

Monday 11th November 2013
quotequote all
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-2487054...
Good or bad?
At least he tried to find out what it was like being a normal motorist

dave7692

683 posts

159 months

Monday 11th November 2013
quotequote all
Well he's sort of right, regardless of his job he still pays council tax and thus has the same rights as any other taxpayer.

As for people saying its his fault that the fault in the road was not addressed, do they honestly think he is solely responsible for deciding what roads are maintained and how? He would obviously have a team of surveyors and engineer's who decide what sections of road are repaired and when.

He's likely just the guy who sits and budgets all day and tells the Engineer's how much they can spend on the roads.

Amateurish

8,280 posts

252 months

Monday 11th November 2013
quotequote all
Total non story. Plus, he's a councillor not an officer.

0000

13,966 posts

221 months

Monday 11th November 2013
quotequote all
dave7692 said:
He's likely just the guy who sits and budgets all day and tells the Engineer's how much they can spend on the roads.
Should have given them more money / asked them how it could be better spent / quit if he wasn't up to the job then. I'd think it was his responsibility to maintain the roads, but responsibility doesn't seem to mean much in this day and age. The claims handlers seem to agree at least.

Krikkit

27,938 posts

211 months

Monday 11th November 2013
quotequote all
What a ludicrous story. Should a minister for safety never make a claim if they have an accident?

dave7692

683 posts

159 months

Monday 11th November 2013
quotequote all
0000 said:
dave7692 said:
He's likely just the guy who sits and budgets all day and tells the Engineer's how much they can spend on the roads.
Should have given them more money / asked them how it could be better spent / quit if he wasn't up to the job then. I'd think it was his responsibility to maintain the roads, but responsibility doesn't seem to mean much in this day and age. The claims handlers seem to agree at least.
Sadly I don't think its as simple as just "giving them more money" any more he's probably given a pretty strict budget to keep to otherwise he's penalised.

The days of Councils having vast maintenance budgets that they actually struggled to spend are long gone as apparently the money is "needed" elsewhere.

AJB

856 posts

245 months

Monday 11th November 2013
quotequote all
So if the managing director of a company has their personal car hit and damaged by one of the work vans in the company car park, they shouldn't claim on insurance - they should resign instead...?!?

As others have said, strange non-story.

0000

13,966 posts

221 months

Monday 11th November 2013
quotequote all
AJB said:
So if the managing director of a company has their personal car hit and damaged by one of the work vans in the company car park, they shouldn't claim on insurance - they should resign instead...?!?
There's a difference between someone else's happenstance and your systematic failure. Given what the roads look like around much of the country I wouldn't be surprised if him hitting a pothole was the latter. If he's been getting the vans and his car to line up against each other in a Top Gear style football match, then no, I think he shouldn't claim on insurance.

Smanks

3,100 posts

217 months

Monday 11th November 2013
quotequote all
AJB said:
So if the managing director of a company has their personal car hit and damaged by one of the work vans in the company car park, they shouldn't claim on insurance - they should resign instead...?!?

As others have said, strange non-story.
I think the point they were making is that it was his responsibility to make sure the roads are in an acceptable condition in the first place.

psgcarey

612 posts

192 months

Monday 11th November 2013
quotequote all
Smanks said:
I think the point they were making is that it was his responsibility to make sure the roads are in an acceptable condition in the first place.
It makes it quite clear in the article that he was not. Was a few years previously, and is now, but not when he claimed.

MarJay

2,181 posts

205 months

Monday 11th November 2013
quotequote all
Councillors set overall policy, and council officers expedite that policy. I doubt he had any influence on the claim, and actually he was making a symbolic gesture to his team to say "Get your backsides in gear and sort it out".

It would have been worse (IMO) for him to use undue influence to get his local road resurfaced, and actually he did exactly the right thing.