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

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.

outfox

I came off when I hit a pothole submerged beneath water in Cork City 2 years ago. In a cycle lane FFS. Did about €200 worth of damage to bike and clothing. I emailed Cork City Council, but got no reply. I left it go.
But a few months later, two finger joints developed some stiffness, and remain so. I put this down to the crash, as I came down hard on that hand. I'm probably looking at arthritis in my old age.
Looking back, I should have sought compensation, even just to teach the gobsh1tes a lesson as Beasty says. Potholes on the road are one thing, but in a cycle lane is ridiculous.

traprunner

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

Earlier this year on a dark and wet morning I was walking to work through Ringsend so there was street lighting. I was crossing a road and stepped on what I thought was just wet tarmac. I didn't realise that it was actually a pothole and I went in nearly ankle deep. Are you are saying I was not walking in accordance with conditions?

benneca1

outfox wrote: »

I came off when I hit a pothole submerged beneath water in Cork City 2 years ago. In a cycle lane FFS. Did about €200 worth of damage to bike and clothing. I emailed Cork City Council, but got no reply. I left it go.
But a few months later, two finger joints developed some stiffness, and remain so. I put this down to the crash, as I came down hard on that hand. I'm probably looking at arthritis in my old age.
Looking back, I should have sought compensation, even just to teach the gobsh1tes a lesson as Beasty says. Potholes on the road are one thing, but in a cycle lane is ridiculous.

Exactly what fault lay with the council the rain ? the pothole ? you say it was submerged beneath water The gob****es as you call them do not pay it is you and I in increased charges

ford2600

On a general point are some people suggesting that no one should ever be allowed claim for a defect on a public road causing loss? Seriously?

If the answer is no, but in certain certain circumstances people should be allowed claim; who decides on the circumstances?

I'm aware of a case where a mature gentleman cycling slowly entered a pothole(which developed at a very poorly reinstated trench combined with allowing private property owners being allowed discharge water onto road developed) went over handlebars and suffered injuries which require him to spend the rest of his life in a wheelchair, modified house etc. Should he be allowed claim, or should we as a society, say hard luck, suck it up? Maybe the council engineer should have done his job, enforced the terms of subcontractors obligation to reinstate the road and not allowed people to discharge their surface water onto public road(Local Authorities have extensive powers under section 76 of the roads act 1993).

Or how about high speed accidents on newly constructed motorways because they got the superelevation wrong on the transition between straights and curves; multiple examples of this along our new motorways?

About ten years ago there was a huge problem with road construction, where a non wearing surface was left in position for months on end, which in time developed into a surface with a very low skid resistance. It was a factor in one of worst accidents in history of state, and many other accidents.

For the most part in my experience most claims against local authorities in relation to road accidents can be accounted
*allowing for a tiny fee contractors at will to cut up road and not be forced to reinstate in compliance with best practice. Given that even the best reinstatement will weaken a road there is a better way of doing this. It would require a bit of organisation, planning etc and of course it doesn't get done
* Our abysmal failure to properly drain roads. Our construction standards are generally quite good but poor drainage will ruin the best road.
* Loose chippings on newly surfaced roads, although on most of these driver error is a massive component(i.e. too fast).

As a society we do have a significant problem with some false claims and exaggerated injuries but it doesn't mean everyone is a chancer.

Maybe given it's Friday just rant away!!

outfox

benneca1 wrote: »

Exactly what fault lay with the council the rain ? the pothole ? you say it was submerged beneath water The gob****es as you call them do not pay it is you and I in increased charges

So whose fault was it? Mine? I was going slowly, about 18-20 km/h at a guess. I checked the hole afterwards, and found it was caused by cracking around a gully. IMO, the Council were deficient for 2 reasons:

1. Not ensuring the gully was clean and unblocked, so that water would drain to the storm sewer network.
2. Not repairing a defective road surface at the gully-road interface.

I've never sued anyone in my life, and probably never will because I don't want to promote the compo culture you refer to. And there is a compo culture, certainly among a certain subset of the population.

But sometimes accidents happen through no fault of the victim, often related to defective work undertaken (or not undertaken as the case may be) by another party. There has to be accountability. I don't want money for my crash. But somebody did not do their job, and I suffered (and will suffer into the future). In this case, the responsible person may have been an engineer with responsibility for cycle lanes. Or a road maintenance crew who didn't clean the drain. Or a subcontractor who left the gully in a sh1tty condition when they installed it. I heard after that the hole had been there for several days, possibly a week or more.
It's the total lack of accountability that annoys the hell out of me.

keyboard_cat

duffman3833 wrote:

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

But it could have just as easily been a pothole the fact is if you are cycling or driving at a speed that you cannot come to a complete stop within the amount of road you can see in front of you, then you are going too fast, bombing down hills and around corners and being heedless and assuming the county council has maintained the road surface is silly and dangerous

Burning Bridges

check on "fix my street" and see if the pothole was reported.

tomasrojo

keyboard_cat wrote: »

But it could have just as easily been a pothole the fact is if you are cycling or driving at a speed that you cannot come to a complete stop within the amount of road you can see in front of you, then you are going too fast

That rule of thumb, which is probably the most important bit of road advice anyone can get, can't apply to every possible obstacle. You can see the road ahead perfectly for some distance and still not see some potholes in time. You don't scan the road to the visible horizon for potholes; you can't. You usually see a smaller one a few seconds before you hit it. In contrast, looking out for animals, pedestrians, cyclists and motorised vehicles is within just about anyone's ability; they can be seen from tens, usually hundreds of metres away.

You also can't weave around every puddle after rain for fear of one being a pothole. Sometimes you're forced by traffic to go through puddles. You don't have to be going at great speed to damage a bike in a pothole either. A heavily laden bike can be damaged at relatively low speed. A trailer can overturned at relatively low speed.

Whether you can get compensation, I'd be very uncertain. A German lady was killed on the quays in Dublin as a direct consequence of hitting a pothole (over ten years ago?) and I don't remember any court case or compensation mentioned for failure to maintain the road.

ED E

Send your bill to the minister as he's so sure you have to stay in such a lane.