Local Authority Response Re Claim

Hi all, for info

This is the response you can expect from your local authority if you submit a claim!

I reported the defect after the incident and you can see that there is no possible means to check the history of this defect!

Obviously no authority vehicles travel this route and if they do it's not their problem!

And this huge hole appeared overnight!

When taking the photographs, I witnessed many severe impacts, horrendous.

I hate to think of the damage caused to vehicles inbetween the time of damage and the inspection, would have been thousands of vehicles.

 

 

Public Liability Claim

We refer to our previous correspondence.

Claims involving damage on a Highway are assessed in a two-stage process. Firstly, it must be proven by the Claimant that there was a dangerous defect on the highway and this caused damage and, secondly, can the Authority rely upon the special defence to a claim as set out by statute under s58 of The Highways Act 1980. For the purposes of your claim, it is accepted that there was a dangerous defect on Beach Road at the time of the accident and that this defect caused damage to your vehicle. The Authority must now consider the provisions of s58 of the Highways Act.

 

S58 of the Highways Act states: -

 

58 Special defence in action against a highway authority for damages for non-repair of highway.
(1 )In an action against a highway authority in respect of damage resulting from their failure to maintain a highway maintainable at the public expense it is a defence (without prejudice to any other defence or the application of the law relating to contributory negligence) to prove that the authority had taken such care as in all the circumstances was reasonably required to secure that the part of the highway to which the action relates was not dangerous for traffic.

(2 )For the purposes of a defence under subsection (1) above, the court shall in particular have regard to the following matters:—

(a)the character of the highway, and the traffic which was reasonably to be expected to use it;
(b)the standard of maintenance appropriate for a highway of that character and used by such traffic;
(c)the state of repair in which a reasonable person would have expected to find the highway;
(d)whether the highway authority knew, or could reasonably have been expected to know, that the condition of the part of the highway to which the action relates was likely to cause danger to users of the highway;
(e)where the highway authority could not reasonably have been expected to repair that part of the highway before the cause of action arose, what warning notices of its condition had been displayed;
but for the purposes of such a defence it is not relevant to prove that the highway authority had arranged for a competent person to carry out or supervise the maintenance of the part of the highway to which the action relates unless it is also proved that the authority had given him proper instructions with regard to the maintenance of the highway and that he had carried out the instructions.

 

Section 58 of the highways act requires an Authority to evidence such care as in all the circumstances was reasonably required to secure that the part of the highway to which the action relates was not dangerous for traffic. 

 

Beach Road is classified as a major distributor and is inspected every month by a qualified highway inspector. Beach Road was inspected on the 19th January and there were no potholes present. We received a complaint on the 30th January about a pothole near Whitehouse Primary School. An inspector went out the next day and given the size of the pothole he ordered an emergency repair that was completed the same day.

 

We are of the view that the inspection frequency of Beach Road is reasonable, that we were unaware of the pothole at the time of your accident and that the pothole was repaired within 24 hours of it being reported.

 

It is therefore our view, in line with the provisions of s58, that the Authority dispensed its duty to ensure such care as in all the circumstances as reasonably required to secure that the part of the highway to which the action relates is not dangerous for traffic. The Authority has no offers of compensation to make.

 

We understand that you may well be disappointed at our decision and this is only to be expected. However, please rest assured that we do not take such decisions lightly and only deny liability where there are solid legal grounds for doing so. You are entitled to appeal the decision, however, we will only consider appeals in writing that state why, with evidence, we have either misinterpreted the law or incorrectly stated the facts of your claim. However, we would emphasise that any appeal to this decision will not be considered within the Corporate Complaints or Members Enquiries processes.

 

As always, you remain at liberty to seek legal advice and/or representation at any time, or to proceed via the small claims court should you wish to do so.  Alternatively, you may wish to contact the Citizens Advice Bureau.

 

Should you require any further information please do not hesitate to contact me at the above address. 

 

Yours sincerely