Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

Crashed Porsche into concrete in missing of road can i claim from council

Options
«134

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    OldmanMondeo
    Registered Users Posts: 3,009 ✭✭✭OldmanMondeo


    Don't think you have a case. You should have notice the traffic island, no matter how small it is.


  • Options
    #3
    neacy69
    Registered Users Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭neacy69


    those pics are loading way too slow you might consider hosting them on imagevenue or something


  • Options
    #4
    crosstownk
    Registered Users Posts: 12,863 ✭✭✭✭crosstownk


    OldmanMondeo wrote: »
    Don't think you have a case. You should have notice the traffic island, no matter how small it is.


    That's more or less what I was thinking too - but should there not be a round blue sign with a white arrow like the one in the fourth pic? Maybe the absence of that might be grounds for claim...................?
    Untitled Image




  • Options
    #5
    roughan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 426 ✭✭roughan


    They are the before and after pics
    before there was no bollard
    and they had it fixed 2 hours later
    all it was ,was 4 inches of concrete in middle of road unlit etc


  • Options
    #6
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    It's a traffic island, and you drove onto it. I doubt they have any liability. There is no requirement to indicate or light up traffic islands.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    roughan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 426 ✭✭roughan


    the cops agreed with me and told me they will act as witness if required on my behalf has anything like this happened anybody else?


  • Options
    #8
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,727 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    roughan wrote: »
    the cops agreed with me and told me they will act as witness if required on my behalf has anything like this happened anybody else?
    Saying and doing are two different things!
    If you took the turn wide, why didn't the kerb not do the same kind of damage as it appears to be the same height?

    Those photos remind me of dial-up - thanks for the memory!


  • Options
    #9
    mack1
    Registered Users Posts: 451 ✭✭mack1


    I reckon you do have a case - a guy I used to work with claimed for having the suspension fixed on his car after driving through a bad pothole and the council paid it.

    End of the day you pay your road tax and should expect a road that will not cause damage to your car.


  • Options
    #10
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    mack1 wrote: »
    End of the day you pay your road tax and should expect a road that will not cause damage to your car.
    Except that he wasn't on the road. He left the roadway and that's when the damage occured.


  • Options
    #11
    ceidefields
    Registered Users Posts: 125 ✭✭ceidefields


    See I wrecked the axel of my Passat on a huge pothole and it cost about a grand to fix. Took it up with the council and they told me to feck off.

    Not to mention that at the same time my hub cap flew off and bounced off another car that was going in the other direction! luckily nothing damaged on the other car


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Golferx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 251 ✭✭Golferx


    Council liability falls under the definition of FEASANCE Law.

    While they are obliged to make any repair good, they cannot be held liable for the defect appearing in the first place, except if it is a previous repair which has become undone.

    w.r.t. potholes? If it's a new pothole the Council are not liable, if it's an old pothole, which was repaired previously, you have a case due to defective repair.

    For €2k, you could chance your arm in the Small Claims Court, however, should you win there, the Council has the right to appeal to a higher Court, and that's where Lawyers get involved.


  • Options
    #13
    mikemac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,986 ✭✭✭✭mikemac


    seamus wrote: »
    Except that he wasn't on the road. He left the roadway and that's when the damage occured.

    Yep, you weren't on the road when this happened, you mounted a kerb. The kerb is pretty clear in the pics
    I'd say you have no valid claim.

    If you want to claim then go ahead but I don't think you'll get anywhere.

    And can do something with the photos, it's sloooooow.


  • Options
    #14
    FX Meister
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,217 ✭✭✭FX Meister


    Golferx wrote: »
    For €2k, you could chance your arm in the Small Claims Court, however, should you win there, the Council has the right to appeal to a higher Court, and that's where Lawyers get involved.

    That's BS. The small claims court is for people who have bought goods or services for private use from someone selling them in the course of business. FACT


  • Options
    #15
    Esel
    Registered Users Posts: 22,286 ✭✭✭✭Esel


    I also think you are sol. You drive onto a traffic island - even without the bollard, you should definitely have seen it if you were paying attention. Swinging wide might have been part of your mistake - better to have waited til the kids cleared the junction.

    You could certainly try a claim, nothing to lose. Can't see you being successful though.

    Why are those pictures so sloooooooow?

    Not your ornery onager



  • Options
    #16
    uberwolf
    Registered Users Posts: 7,580 ✭✭✭uberwolf


    the rapid repair smacks of a policy. It also suggests a suspicion that they were in the wrong.

    Was it the kerbing or the stunted bollard that caused the damage?

    The bollard is there to guide the motorist around an obstacle.


  • Options
    #17
    TychoCaine
    Registered Users Posts: 673 ✭✭✭TychoCaine


    I dunno. I think you might have a case. That metal plate on the island you hit looks to me to be the base of a previous bollard. That would imply that we have here is a traffic island that normally has a bollard on it. You could even argue that the existance of a bollard is an admission by the corpo that the island was not visible enough without it. If you follow golferx's reasoning, the corpo's failure to repair the damage within a reasonable time (it'd been in that state for at least a week), was what caused you to not see the island, so they'd be liable for the costs.


  • Options
    #18
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    uberwolf wrote: »
    the rapid repair smacks of a policy. It also suggests a suspicion that they were in the wrong..

    Or that they didnt know about the bollard being gone (someone else crashed into the lighted bollard?) so rectified the problem as soon as they found out.


  • Options
    #19
    miju
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 8,486 ✭✭✭miju


    TychoCaine wrote: »
    the corpo's failure to repair the damage within a reasonable time (it'd been in that state for at least a week),.

    to which the reply would be from any smart lawyer worth his salt. how did you know it's been like that for a week? if you knew it was like that for a week then you knew the obstacle was there


  • Options
    #20
    Anan1
    Registered Users Posts: 22,815 ✭✭✭✭Anan1


    miju wrote: »
    to which the reply would be from any smart lawyer worth his salt. how did you know it's been like that for a week? if you knew it was like that for a week then you knew the obstacle was there
    Read the thread!OP answered this in his first post.


  • Options
    #21
    TychoCaine
    Registered Users Posts: 673 ✭✭✭TychoCaine


    Anan1 wrote: »
    Read the thread!OP answered this in his first post.

    And to save you the effort, the cops crashed into the same traffic island last week!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Mexicola
    Closed Accounts Posts: 277 ✭✭Mexicola


    OldmanMondeo wrote:
    Don't think you have a case. You should have notice the traffic island, no matter how small it is.

    I agree here. Observation is especially important when driving a low car like that.

    By the way is there a reason why you have to mention you have a Porsche/Boxster? The same reasoning would apply to any car... ? :rolleyes: I dont think the council would change their opinion based on how expensive your car is...


  • Options
    #23
    deman
    Registered Users Posts: 1,672 ✭✭✭deman


    So basically, what the OP's saying is that he went off the road, damaged his car, and it's not his fault and wants someone else to pay for the damage?


  • Options
    #24
    Anan1
    Registered Users Posts: 22,815 ✭✭✭✭Anan1


    Mexicola wrote: »
    I agree here. Observation is especially important when driving a low car like that.

    By the way is there a reason why you have to mention you have a Porsche/Boxster? The same reasoning would apply to any car... ? :rolleyes: I dont think the council would change their opinion based on how expensive your car is...
    ?? A Boxster is lower-slung than the average car.


  • Options
    #25
    roughan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 426 ✭✭roughan


    I dunno why pics are so slow they are on an 8mb line
    anyway
    i drove OVER a traffic island that previously had a lit bollard on it
    it was unlit and in there was 4 inches of concrete in the centre of the road
    i could not see the island as it slopes into the road and there was no markings around it
    any road should be safe to drive down the car could have easily gone on fire if the petrol tank was split by this
    it was fixed in 2 hours by the council


  • Options
    #26
    roughan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 426 ✭✭roughan


    deman wrote: »
    So basically, what the OP's saying is that he went off the road, damaged his car, and it's not his fault and wants someone else to pay for the damage?

    No i did not go off the road
    i did damage my car
    it is the councils fault
    and i do want someone else to pay for this

    can everybody get off their high horse about this
    i didnt ask for comments about the car
    anyway was onto Guards /Insurance company about this and its all looking very positive in my favour


  • Options
    #27
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 91,586 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    IIRC if the problem had been reported to the council and they hadn't repaired in resonable time you might have some grounds. If it wasn't reported then I don't think you have a case. :(


  • Options
    #28
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Most people would consider you off the road once you mount a kerb. You drove over a kerb. From the pics it looks fairly obvious that its there tbh.


  • Options
    #29
    deman
    Registered Users Posts: 1,672 ✭✭✭deman


    A traffic island is NOT the road. Therefore, if you hit the traffic island, you went off the road. If anyone is on a high horse here it's the one driving a Porshe who doesn't seem to pay enough attention when driving. You swung out to avoid kids? Why didn't you just stop? Or were you in too big of a rush?


  • Options
    #30
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users Posts: 24,992 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    Stekelly wrote: »
    From the pics it looks fairly obvious that its there tbh.
    Well, in fairness to the OP, it looks pretty obvious because it is central to the topic of this thread and we are all concentrating on it. It might not be so obvious in normal night driving conditions where there are other distractions.


    Re using Porsche - it does make opening the thread more appealing compared to " Crashed Fiesta into........"


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    unkel
    Registered Users Posts: 65,397 ✭✭✭✭unkel
    Chauffe, Marcel, chauffe!


    roughan wrote: »
    was onto Guards /Insurance company about this and its all looking very positive in my favour

    That's great news! Do us a favour and update your thread as you go along


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement