Accident claims question:
In March I posted a question about a damaged tyre (£119) due to a pothole. The advice I was given I followed up and having examined the Authority's maintenance records wonder if the following would be sufficient to succeed in the SMC. The Authority has stated they will rely on Section 58(1) of the 1980 Act even if the pothole was considered to be dangerous. It would appear from the records that the area in which my accident occurred had been reported as potholed on 23 & 27 January. These were repaired on 29 January. On 23 February further potholes and vehicle damage were reported for the same area (defined by a double bend, although the reports were not particularly locationwise precise). It would appear that these areas were not repaired until 3 March. My accident occurred on 25 February. For the first repair to fail in less than a month presumably could call into question the quality of repair. Is the Court likely to take into account when assessing any liablity the fact that the repair did apparently deteriorate within a month and that the report on condition and damage on 23 February was not dealt with until 3 March? On what grounds would an Authority be likely to fail in their reliance on the defence under Section 58 ? Thanks for your comments.
Responses:
Bill Willcocks' response
I think it was me who responded previously. Is there any chance you can e-mail me copies of your documents along with a clear summary of events (dates, location etc) and I could get back to you? I won't charge for it but the devil is in the detail. my e-mail is b.willcocks@kirbysheppard.co.uk.
Do you have a response to add to this question? Login to post a response.
