Class action against poor road safety policy?

[supermono]

"Speed kills" as a campaign has cost us lives. We knew it would from the outset and yet the various players stuck with it. Deaths have stopped reducing, driving standards are down and this can all be proved. Even the insurance companies have discovered from accident figures that people with points are not more dangerous than those without so, in the words of the global warming nuts "the science is beyond question".

So, how long before an enterprising lawyer decides to press a law suit on this? Perhaps against "Safety" camera business bosses? Importers of the dodgyscope? Perhaps even the government / department of transport?

I'm sure if a fighting fund was created there'd be no shortage of contributors -- I'll pledge 100 quid right now. If a tiny tiny proportion of motorists (5 million?) each pledged a tenner that'd be 50 million quid.

There could be a colossal budget for holding these people to account.

Can it happen?

SM

[fatboy b]

Would do if it were in the US.

[gog]

I, also, would throw a £100 into the fund if someone were to take it on!

[alphadog]

I'm sure that councils putting speed ramps that cause serious jolts to vehicles travelling at a large margin under the speed limit, let alone at or near the limit should be liable for any damage incurred.
The research by the TRL used an Astra which showed no problem after traversing speed humps 90 or so times - that was it. Totally unrepresentative. My car has been over 1000s of humps and the majority of the maintenance has been to the suspension.

I believe around 25% of accidents involve a defective vehicle. How many vehicle defects are caused by speed humps?

If the speed limit is 30, then the councils should not be putting damaging obstacles into the road surface that cause excessive wear to crucial vehicle components when travelling at considerably under the maximum legal and safe speed.

Edited by alphadog on Thursday 31st May 17:58

[stackmonkey]

alphadog said:

The research by the TRL used an Astra which showed no problem after traversing speed humps 90 or so times - that was it. Totally unrepresentative.

90 speed humps represented 2.5 days commuting for me during my last job.

[alphadog]

stackmonkey said:

alphadog said:

The research by the TRL used an Astra which showed no problem after traversing speed humps 90 or so times - that was it. Totally unrepresentative.

90 speed humps represented 2.5 days commuting for me during my last job.

Exactly! There should be a massive case against any council who does this to a road. Surely a good lawyer has a good case? What am I missing here?

[catso]

If there's any mileage in this I'll put £100 up too.....

[fluffnik]

Sounds like a good investment to me.

Count me in.

[Spokey]

There like a shot.