Claiming from the council for pothole damage to bikes....

TychoCaine

I was just reading this where a guy in the UK is taking his local council to court over a spill caused by a pothole and it got me thinking.... Councils pay out all the time when cars are damaged by potholes, but what about when a cyclist trashes a carbon rim on the same pothole? The damage caused can easily exceed that done to a car. Has anyone ever tried to claim for repairs/replacements off the council?

jon1981

There is precedent in the UK ...though under tragic circumstances the pothole threw him out in front of a car and he was killed. Also I guess the case was made stronger by the fact that the council was aware of this pothole.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3033555/Widow-cyclist-killed-hitting-pothole-Land-s-End-John-O-Groats-charity-ride-wins-six-figure-compensation-payout.html

The widow of a cyclist killed after hitting a pothole during a charity ride from Land's End to John O'Groats has won a six-figure payout from the council who failed to mend the road.
Martyn Uzzell, 51, died instantly after he was thrown into path of a car by a four-inch deep pothole.
Just a month before the tragedy, the council sent workers to inspect the hole after police said it was a hazard. But it was decided that immediate repairs were not necessary.

Beasty

IIRC case law in Ireland is that if damage to the road is normal "wear and tear" the council are not obliged to go out of their way to repair it and are unlikely to be liable should anyone claim. Once they do repair a road though they must do so to a reasonable standard. I made a successful claim for a poor piece of road repair (actually hard shoulder) done by a council contractor. They didn't put it back at a good enough standard after digging a channel. The contractor went bust during the period my claim was progressing, but ultimately the council's insurers accepted responsibility. My claim was for personal injury and not damage to the bike

It is likely to be different where the council are notified of a dangerous pothole or road condition. If they chose to ignore the notification and leave in place a substandard/dangerous piece of road they may become liable if they do not take reasonable steps to avoid injury/damage (which could, for example, be via cordoning off the relevant hazard)

TychoCaine

Beasty wrote: »

It is likely to be different where the council are notified of a dangerous pothole or road condition. If they chose to ignore the notification and leave in place a substandard/dangerous piece of road they may become liable if they do not take reasonable steps to avoid injury/damage (which could, for example, be via cordoning off the relevant hazard)

... so the moral of the story is to report every pothole on your commute and regular training route *now*, just in case you need to claim later. I think I'll be hitting up fixmystreet.ie later.

It's totally comical that the councils have no obligation to maintain the streets to a safe standard though.

Beasty

TychoCaine wrote: »

It's totally comical that the councils have no obligation to maintain the streets to a safe standard though.

They simply cannot afford to. What I find frustrating is there remains an obsession to add to an underutilised motorway network when the country cannot maintain what it already has.

One other thing is clear - the councils accept there will be some claims but weigh the costs up against the costs of maintaining the road and conclude that overall it's more economical for them to be very choosy about what they repair.

My own claim was not driven by any desire for monetary compensation (I gave my compensation away) - it was more to highlight to the council they should take more care of their roads. The moreclaims that are made the more economical it becomes for councils to undertake the required repairs in a timely fashion.

Supercell

I complained to Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown county council via their online webpage about a pothole on my road and specifically stated I was afraid it was only a matter of time until someone was injured cycling across it. It was filled in less than a week later, was really surprised.

SetOverSet

TychoCaine wrote: »

Has anyone ever tried to claim for repairs/replacements off the council?

I don't recall the exact details as it was around 10 years ago, but guy I worked with successfully claimed from one of the Dublin Councils for damage done to an alloy wheel on his car after hitting a pothole at speed, so perhaps there's some precedent...

jon1981

SetOverSet wrote: »

I don't recall the exact details as it was around 10 years ago, but guy I worked with successfully claimed from one of the Dublin Councils for damage done to an alloy wheel on his car after hitting a pothole at speed, so perhaps there's some precedent...

But Joe they don't even pay road tax ....and now they want me taxes to pay for their bleeding bikes ... Ahhh heyor..

Roger Hassenforder

misfeasance V nonfeasance.

if they repaired the hole but did it badly, and you were able to prove your loss was a result of their negligence, you'd have a case.
Roads Authorities still have the defence of non feasance though.

ted1

Supercell wrote: »

I complained to Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown county council via their online webpage about a pothole on my road and specifically stated I was afraid it was only a matter of time until someone was injured cycling across it. It was filled in less than a week later, was really surprised.

really i complained about to them about the Commons Road and they did nothing, so if you have an accident, they are aware of it

TychoCaine

I think the first thing solicitors do when starting a claim process is to lodge a FOI request to see if the council were warned about the state of the road.

irish_goat

Council have no funds to fix roads --> sue council for damage caused due to lack of road fixing ---> council have no funds to fix roads...

TychoCaine

irish_goat wrote: »

Council have no funds to fix roads --> sue council for damage caused due to lack of road fixing ---> council have no funds to fix roads...

Yup. an Irish solution to an Irish problem.

laraghrider

A friend of mine had a really bad crash. It was due to a badly repaired pot hole where they left a large lump of tar on the road like a just dropping a cement block in the middle of a road. It was on a corner at the bottom of a hill so a) he was doing a good speed but b) it's placement didn't give him any time to adjust and he hit it head on. As I was behind him at the time I could avoid it but he successfully claimed for all his medical bills and his bike which was wrote off. The council fought it for quite a while.

They even went so far as to cut/remove the bad repair, take some pictures of the newly repaired piece of road and present these to the courts as a "this is what they claim caused the accident, if you look at these photos there is nothing there that could cause an accident". Luckily I went back to the spot the day after and took some pictures to show what it was like before the council got there. The judge didn't take kindly to the council trying to cover it up.

Beasty

I took photos a couple of weeks after my accident. A few months later I agreed to meet to council to show them the spot where it happened. the day we had arranged to meet the contactor decided to dig up that precise piece of hard shoulder again. Those photos were invaluable though (and the actions of the contractor possibly encouraged the Council/their insurers to settle, although the fact the contractor then went bust did complicate things as it was the Council's insurance that then had to settle up)

Beasty

irish_goat wrote: »

Council have no funds to fix roads --> sue council for damage caused due to lack of road fixing ---> council have no funds to fix roads...

It's the council's insurance that settles up though (although the level of claims will affect their premiums), certainly on personal injury claims. As I've already said they weigh up the cost of repairs against the likelihood of claims so tend to prioritise the "higher risk" problems

fletch

Put in a claim for an alloy and 2 new tyres with Dublin City Council after I hit a pothole in my car and it bent an alloy and wiped out 2 tyres. Took a lot of letters/phone calls/emails and a year later I got a nice cheque in the post for >€600. I don't see any reason why you couldn't do the same for a bicycle wheel as they can cost considerably more than a car tyre.

duffman3833

Beasty wrote: »

IIRC case law in Ireland is that if damage to the road is normal "wear and tear" the council are not obliged to go out of their way to repair it and are unlikely to be liable should anyone claim. Once they do repair a road though they must do so to a reasonable standard.

They never repair to a reasonable standard, normally they throw gravel in the hole and flatten it but not to a reasonable standard. Its never in line with the road surface, the hole will always have that bit extra in it so it now becomes a bump, me been a cyclist myself at times, i don't like those uneven bumps. Also by just filing it in with gravel its back to been a pothole after a few weeks so it was pointless.

I know a road near me, its a small narrow road, but its still a public road that has good bit of traffic daily and at the end of this road, where it joins onto a bigger road is full of potholes, you cant avoid them. Every few months the council fill them in but they keep becoming potholes again. If the council just fix this area correctly the first time it would probably save them money in long run but no no, never gonna happen

benneca1

I would suggest avoid cycling into potholes then you wont have to sue anybody. If you are daft enough to cycle into one then you should have to explain why you thought it was a good idea when any half normal person would avoid it. This crap in Ireland of suing the council etc. is maddening as ultimately we all pay. What about taking account of your own actions. I smashed my face against a rock in Rostrevor last year lost teeth days at work and a couple of broken fingers, should I sue Down and Mourne council for leaving bloody great rocks on an MTB trail ? I think not. Likewise when cycling pothole are a completely foreseeable and avoidable risk so take responsibility for avoiding them.

jon1981

benneca1 wrote: »

I would suggest avoid cycling into potholes then you wont have to sue anybody. If you are daft enough to cycle into one then you should have to explain why you thought it was a good idea when any half normal person would avoid it. This crap in Ireland of suing the council etc. is maddening as ultimately we all pay. What about taking account of your own actions. I smashed my face against a rock in Rostrevor last year lost teeth days at work and a couple of broken fingers, should I sue Down and Mourne council for leaving bloody great rocks on an MTB trail ? I think not. Likewise when cycling pothole are a completely foreseeable and avoidable risk so take responsibility for avoiding them.

Seriously? For start, on a MTB trail you expect there to be rocks and holes there!! On the road, i'm pretty sure cyclists don't purposely cycle into potholes if they can be avoided. :rolleyes:

Beasty

benneca1 wrote: »

ILikewise when cycling pothole are a completely foreseeable

No they are not. Sometimes they may be masked (possibly by standing water). Sometimes the light (or dark) may make them difficult to make out. Sometimes they extend into the road in a way that may force a cyclist out into overtaking traffic so maybe you end up ploughing through the pothole. Sometimes, yes they are avoidable (and who in their right mind is going to deliberately go through a pothole they can reasonable avoid)

benneca1

Typical compo culture in this country it is always somebody elses fault. I suggest we all take responsibility for our own actions why should the public at large pay if someone is foolish/unlucky enough to cycle into a pothole caused by road wear and tear.
It is time we grew up as a nation

duffman3833

benneca1 wrote: »

Typical compo culture in this country it is always somebody elses fault. I suggest we all take responsibility for our own actions why should the public at large pay if someone is foolish/unlucky enough to cycle into a pothole caused by road wear and tear.
It is time we grew up as a nation

thing is that any fixed potholes are only done if someone complains or makes claim, otherwise they ignore them

benneca1

duffman3833 wrote: »

thing is that any fixed potholes are only done if someone complains or makes claim, otherwise they ignore them

No problem with reporting I have a serious problem with suing I personally think this cuture has killed any initiatives in relation to leisure facilities in this country and then we whine cos all our kids are overweight and there is nothing to occupy our kids. My missus is Spanish and the culture there is if you fall trip cycle into a pothole etc etc then you have to prove why you were not a daft bugger in the first place and even if you succeed in that then you will be asked to demonstrate if it is reasonable that the authority should know about this particular pothole from the thousands of kilometres of road way under that municipality.

Coillte have banned cycling from all forest roads preciously because of this type of attirude

Zyzz

benneca1 wrote: »

I would suggest avoid cycling into potholes then you wont have to sue anybody. If you are daft enough to cycle into one then you should have to explain why you thought it was a good idea when any half normal person would avoid it. This crap in Ireland of suing the council etc. is maddening as ultimately we all pay. What about taking account of your own actions. I smashed my face against a rock in Rostrevor last year lost teeth days at work and a couple of broken fingers, should I sue Down and Mourne council for leaving bloody great rocks on an MTB trail ? I think not. Likewise when cycling pothole are a completely foreseeable and avoidable risk so take responsibility for avoiding them.

<snip>

death1234567

Zyzz wrote: »

<snip>

To be fair he has a point, even if you don't agree with it. An ambulance chasing, council suing culture leads you to a health and safety disaster like they have in the UK where everything has to go through health and safety checks and nobody can so much as sneeze. You end up with schools where children aren't allowed run at lunch time.

There's a common sense approach that needs to be taken to this type of thing, when you involve the courts/bureaucracy then all common sense is lost. However that's not to say that in certain cases the courts are required or that the council should never pay out compensation.

Beasty

benneca1 wrote: »

Typical compo culture in this country it is always somebody elses fault. I suggest we all take responsibility for our own actions why should the public at large pay if someone is foolish/unlucky enough to cycle into a pothole caused by road wear and tear.
It is time we grew up as a nation

I suggest the council take responsibility for their own actions (or lack thereof). That's all my own claim was about - actually repairing things to an adequate standard rather than exposing me and others to unreasonable (in my personal view) risk

Oh - and I did not keep one cent of my compensation. It all was ploughed back into what I considered good cycling causes. I would also add that I could easily have claimed over 3 times as much as I did, but my own claim was absolutely nothing to do with money in my own mind.

duffman3833

benneca1 wrote: »

No problem with reporting I have a serious problem with suing I personally think this cuture has killed any initiatives in relation to leisure facilities in this country and then we whine cos all our kids are overweight and there is nothing to occupy our kids. My missus is Spanish and the culture there is if you fall trip cycle into a pothole etc etc then you have to prove why you were not a daft bugger in the first place and even if you succeed in that then you will be asked to demonstrate if it is reasonable that the authority should know about this particular pothole from the thousands of kilometres of road way under that municipality.

Coillte have banned cycling from all forest roads preciously because of this type of attirude

i agree with you on this, people suing over stupid things. Recently woman sued airline cause hot tea was split on a child during flight, saying the tea wasn't at the correct temp. Tea is meant to be hot... any way i agree that you have to prove that your not a daft bugger. Could say driver/cyclist wasn't paying attention, not got enough lights on car/bike to illuminate road etc. Could say it rained and was water on road so couldn't see pothole too

benneca1

Exactly I tried to run a family fun event in work lately and when we went through the whole health and safety aspect we had to give up. We could only let the kids paint, no running no football cycling treasure hunt etc etc all too dangerous or our insurers wanted an arm and a leg. I ask what is to blame for this

Answer a rampant compo culture which pervades our society we need to cop on

Beasty

Like it or not, this sort of thing only moves in one direction. There is an expectation (and indeed a legal requirement) that people/organisations will take reasonable steps to protect people and their assets from damage. What is considered "reasonable" changes over time, as new safety standards evolve. But those standards are only going to improve resulting in increased expectation and indeed legal thresholds to be met. Whether you see it as progressive or indeed regressive, ultimately expectations "grow" over time

cython

benneca1 wrote: »

Exactly I tried to run a family fun event in work lately and when we went through the whole health and safety aspect we had to give up. We could only let the kids paint, no running no football cycling treasure hunt etc etc all too dangerous or our insurers wanted an arm and a leg. I ask what is to blame for this

Answer a rampant compo culture which pervades our society we need to cop on

The councils also need to cop on to repairing roads to an adequate standard though. Half-assed repairs are completely negligent, and should be treated as such. If compensation for incidents such as this were as bad as you were making out, it would already be more cost effective for the repairs to be completed properly, but time and again we see this is not happening. I'm not suggesting that such claims should be used as leverage to get proper repairs either, mind, but people and organisations should be held accountable for cutting corners.

CiboC

I got my local council to pay for a service and new wheel for my bike based on damage caused by the appalling road surface that I had to cycle on daily. Not just one pothole but a sequence of ramps that had disintegrated over a period of harsh winters to rubble. Unavoidable as they were the width of the road and there was no other way for me to go.

Shortly after that the managed to find the money to repair them properly.

Lumen

Claiming for actual damage to an actual bike caused by an actual pothole is not "compo culture".

Compo culture would be looking for the pothole, falling into it deliberately and then suing for emotional distress and punitive damages.

Beasty

My own view on some of the personal injury claims is the value of awards often seems very high for the amount of pain and distress suffered. I was told if I took my claim to court I could, IIRC, claim up to €38k, and this now seems the starting point for many personal injury claims (as it was at the time and presumably still is the level of claim that can be dealt with at a certain level of court). The PIAB was supposed to standardise claim levels, but in my case the two counterparties (council and contractor) could not agree to take it that way, meaning lawyers had to be involved on both sides. I could definitely have held out for a lot more based on all the precedent out there but as I've mentioned already my claim was more to do with getting those parties to accept their responsibilities than maximising the amount of cash I could extract

benneca1

Lumen wrote: »

Claiming for actual damage to an actual bike caused by an actual pothole is not "compo culture".

Compo culture would be looking for the pothole, falling into it deliberately and then suing for emotional distress and punitive damages.

Of course it is why did our legal system decide our roads have to be like tennis courts. One high court judge decided I forget who that every problem that befalls one has to be someones fault. This has led to this culture of suing ive been cycling nigh on 45 years now and if i bugger up a wheel in a pot hole i know i shoulda watched out. Likewise if i bugger up my carbon wheels on a training spin in meath i dont blame council i say shoulda had bombproof aksiums on. Everyone should be responsible for actions.

Lumen

benneca1 wrote: »

Of course it is why did our legal system decide our roads have to be like tennis courts. One high court judge decided I forget who that every problem that befalls one has to be someones fault. This has led to this culture of suing ive been cycling nigh on 45 years now and if i bugger up a wheel in a pot hole i know i shoulda watched out. Likewise if i bugger up my carbon wheels on a training spin in meath i dont blame council i say shoulda had bombproof aksiums on. Everyone should be responsible for actions.

Who is suggesting suing for a buckled wheel? Not me.

However, if were to I hit a large pothole (I mean the sort that you could hide a melon in) and crash, destroying my frame and requiring hospital treatment, I don't think it's unreasonable to seek remedy.

benneca1

Lumen wrote: »

Who is suggesting suing for a buckled wheel? Not me.

However, if were to I hit a large pothole (I mean the sort that you could hide a melon in) and crash, destroying my frame and requiring hospital treatment, I don't think it's unreasonable to seek remedy.

Ill leave it there im off for a spin and maybe ill clatter into an unlit pothole and sue for damage and get a nice new ti bike, hold on that would be like stealing from myself as ill only have to pay in increased insurance and taxes, but everybody id doing it so why not. we wonder why insurance and tax etc are so high


Typical of us Irish

Zyzz

benneca1 wrote: »

Ill leave it there im off for a spin and maybe ill clatter into an unlit pothole and sue for damage and get a nice new ti bike, hold on that would be like stealing from myself as ill only have to pay in increased insurance and taxes, but everybody id doing it so why not. we wonder why insurance and tax etc are so high


Typical of us Irish

Watch out for those giant rocks you missed the last time

Lumen

benneca1 wrote: »

Ill leave it there im off for a spin and maybe ill clatter into an unlit pothole and sue for damage and get a nice new ti bike, hold on that would be like stealing from myself as ill only have to pay in increased insurance and taxes, but everybody id doing it so why not. we wonder why insurance and tax etc are so high

Typical of us Irish

I'm not Irish. I don't know whether that affects your rant or not. Maybe you need a new rant about compo culture foreigners.

Beasty

Just to declare an interest - I'm not Irish either - maybe you've hit upon something there Lumen (not too hard I hope!)

benneca1

Not a rant just a sad comment on the type of society we have left our kids and you know what youre right why get excited we get the society we deserve. anyhow spin was fine avoided those killer potholes

Roger Hassenforder

benneca1 wrote: »

Not a rant just a sad comment on the type of society we have left our kids and you know what youre right why get excited we get the society we deserve. anyhow spin was fine avoided those killer potholes

Bloody foreigners claimin of our Councils...

In fairness while you're making some good points, for me issue for me is the ridiculous amounts of money we pay in compensation. If you've suffered a loss through someones negligence you should be entitled to seek redress, but the amounts should be reasonable and proportionate.

benneca1

To clarify wasnt talking about foreginers . I was talking about Irish society and how we have a compensation culture and the knock on implications it has for all of us.

Roger Hassenforder

benneca1 wrote: »

To clarify wasnt talking about foreginers . I was talking about Irish society and how we have a compensation culture and the knock on implications it has for all of us.

I know (it was a crap bon mot)
& I agree with a lot of what you're saying!

laraghrider

benneca1 wrote: »

To clarify wasnt talking about foreginers . I was talking about Irish society and how we have a compensation culture and the knock on implications it has for all of us.

So I a general question here and for what it's worth I agree with a lot of your points. Personally if I hit a pot hole Id' say (circumstances pending obviously) most likely my own fault for not looking. I've broken a wheel after hitting a pot hole and to be honest I was chatting so chalked it up to my own fault. To this affect I've no problem.

However two incidents I'd like to raise which offer a different slant. In the incident that happened my friend (page 1) there was a pot hole that was repaired by the council. It was however repaired to an exceptionally poor standard which placed quite possibly a larger hazzard on the road that was less visible than a pot hole and a worse hazzard than what the pothole would actually have presented. Surely given the amount of tax we pay through various channels work carried out on the road should be to an acceptable standard? In this case the council were found liable for poor quality repair.

Secondly an incident I heard of locally and saw the aftermath of where by 2 cars in the dark hours of a winter morning hit a lump of black earth/gravel/stone not really sure what that was accidentally dumped off a lorry into the middle of the road from one of the local quarries. One of these cars ended up on it's roof and the driver is now blind in one eye. Both drivers sued the quarry for negligence. Should this incident be a case of stupid driver or was the quarry at fault?

keyboard_cat

laraghrider wrote:

A friend of mine had a really bad crash. It was due to a badly repaired pot hole where they left a large lump of tar on the road like a just dropping a cement block in the middle of a road. It was on a corner at the bottom of a hill so a) he was doing a good speed but b) it's placement didn't give him any time to adjust

Do people not drive/cycle at a pace that allows them to break or maneuver around potholes and rocks and other things that are more or less standard on Irish roads.
If you are coming down a hill around a bend use you breaks ffs because for all you know that lump of tar that he had no time to adjust around could have as easily been a person or a child walking

traprunner

keyboard_cat wrote: »

Do people not drive/cycle at a pace that allows them to break or maneuver around potholes and rocks and other things that are more or less standard on Irish roads.
If you are coming down a hill around a bend use you breaks ffs because for all you know that lump of tar that he had no time to adjust around could have as easily been a person or a child walking

Generally people would be a lot bigger and easier to spot. Tar may be unseen due to shimmer on the ground when wet.

benneca1

If you are hurtling down a hill at such a pace that you cannot see a lump of tar or a rock then you have to take responsibility for your actions. You weren't cycling according to the conditions. In a race someone will have driven the course before you and removed such obstacles. Cycling at race pace downhill on an open road around corners is asking for trouble. But of course the default in Ireland is someone should have foreseen this lump of tar falling off and made it safe in case there was a cyclist who wished to train at the limit. One could equally argue that the cyclist should have sent another rider in front travelling at a reasonable pace to identify hazards and let his colleague know

laraghrider

keyboard_cat wrote: »

Do people not drive/cycle at a pace that allows them to break or maneuver around potholes and rocks and other things that are more or less standard on Irish roads.
If you are coming down a hill around a bend use you breaks ffs because for all you know that lump of tar that he had no time to adjust around could have as easily been a person or a child walking

The problem was that he couldn't even see it. I'm sure it could have been a child of person walking however I'd say unlikely given it's placement in the middle of the road on a bend. A person, as said, would also be a lot easier to spot.

benneca1 wrote: »

But of course the default in Ireland is someone should have foreseen this lump of tar falling off and made it safe in case there was a cyclist who wished to train at the limit.

No the default would be that when the council who own the responsibility for the road surface "fix" a portion of the road that they do so to an acceptable standard. To fix it in the manner they did was pure negligence on their part which they admitted to by removing the defect before taking clean pictures to present in court. Now had they fixed the pot hole to the proper standard we'd have come around the corner absolutely fine. The speed had absolutely no bearing on the visibility of the object, black on black made it super difficult to spot. Also who said we were going at race pace? Pure assumption on your part. Ironically your last sentence is somewhat accurate. In seeing him going over his bars it alerted me to the issue with road surface and I stopped in time.

duffman3833

benneca1 wrote: »

If you are hurtling down a hill at such a pace that you cannot see a lump of tar or a rock then you have to take responsibility for your actions. You weren't cycling according to the conditions. In a race someone will have driven the course before you and removed such obstacles. Cycling at race pace downhill on an open road around corners is asking for trouble. But of course the default in Ireland is someone should have foreseen this lump of tar falling off and made it safe in case there was a cyclist who wished to train at the limit. One could equally argue that the cyclist should have sent another rider in front travelling at a reasonable pace to identify hazards and let his colleague know

If it was a pothole that was created by wear and tear yes you should take some responsibility as its created by wear and tear, however a lump of tar is not cause by wear and tear. It caused by sloppy maintenance of the road. it should never have been there

Beasty

Sometimes I look over my shoulder. Sometimes I look to the right for oncoming overtaking or turning vehicles. Sometimes I am on the lookout for pedestrians who may step out in front of me. Sometimes I have to take evasive action. A lot of the time I am scrutinising the road ahead but it is simply not possible to spot every conceivable hazard. Hence sometimes accidents happen. Is there always someone at fault? Probably but sometimes that may be council officials for not ensuring basic safety standards are applied.