Potholes - How do we enforce repair under S41 Highways Act

[Fastpedaller]

I'm sure I'm not alone in being VERY frustrated with potholes and the apparent lack of care by Councils. I note a Cambridge cycling event was featured on the national (or maybe local) TV news because the roads are in such a poor state the organisers have cancelled the event because of fears for the riders' safety. I have reported several 'killer' holes to Cambridge CC this year, to find the reports are immediately closed (one roundabout had over 80 reports regarding the many holes). The Cambridge Police just dismissed me, referring me to the Council, and stated they can't raise a prosecution under S41 of the Highways Act, because 'they can't prosecute the Council' Is this true?
It comes to something when (as I've done today prior to my journey to the Kit Car Festival at Newark) I need to check the route to see if there may be potholes or other hazards! - It seems there are several holes at a particular roundabout on the A17, unfixed since April, and also many roadside and central reservation flytipped deposits which have been there for OVER A YEAR. How do we get Councils to actually do their job? (Please, nobody suggest gluing ourselves to the road!)

 

[wiggydiggy]

There was some potholes that someone spraypainted willies around, and another I think someone planted a shrub in. They got fixed pretty quick.

In Manchester, an artist called Wanksy.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/trending/st...-around-potholes-to-get-them-filled-1.3055612

The plants are real but I think this article is meant to be satire.

https://www.suffolkgazette.com/pothole-bedding-plants/

 

[Drago]

Failure to aside by ones S.41 obligations are not a criminal act, so the dibble indeed can't enforce it.

This might yield more results, but I still wouldn't hold my breath...


https://www.lgo.org.uk/make-a-compl...port-and-highways/footpaths-and-rights-of-way

 

[kynikos]

With a 37% cut in real terms to central government grants in 10 years there's over £15bn a year less going to local councils to support their priorities. When it's a toss up between, say, supporting vulnerable adults and children and filling in potholes the latter can invariably be 'left until tomorrow'. And with current budget pressures tomorrow will be a long time coming.

So the fundamental answer to the OP's question is to lobby for better funding for local authorities.

 

[Fastpedaller]

I'd agree with kynikos except for the following reasons:-
A 'team' look at the hole and decide if action is required, maybe they white-mark it (I'd hope it doesn't take another visit!)
Another 'team' come along and fill it badly
Another 'team' come along and fill it again.... and again..... and again.
Or they just ignore holes that are VERY DANGEROUS by
a) closing the report
b) Saying they will fill it within 12 weeks (unbelievable)
c) IMPORTANTLY...... insisting that the public decide if it is 'dangerous and likely to cause injury' and then the reporter has a choice
1) Wait 50 minutes on the phone in a queue and then after it is recorded the report is immediately closed and notification sent via a NOREPLY email
2) Try to report via online, which is only possible for non-dangerous potholes, thus it doesn't go into the serious category that it should.
Unbelievably Buckinghamshire Council (where I've reported some horrendous holes still present since January) are STILL using the excuse 'During cold weather the road surface can break, which gives us pothole problems' Yeah, it was chilly in June.

A pitiful service from those who are paid good money to DO THE JOB ONCE PROPERLY instead of multiple times, which must cost even more in the long-run. It would be understandable except for the bare-faced cheek and lies they give when someone does come a cropper.
One of the potholes Bucks CC were told about received an additional report saying
A Mercedes with a flat tyre has been 'dumped' outside ladies house (this was right near the huge pothole that I and many others reported)
Yes you've guessed it........
Council reply...... "we'll send along an inspector, and if it looks like the car has been abandoned we'll take action to remove it"
So......... Pothole causes wrecked tyre, owner then has to pay to get car out of Council compound!
An absolute disgraceful way to run a 'business' - If this wasn't a public service (laugh) people would be sacked and never employed again.

I've tried to make my feelings known to the 'higher up' in Cambridge CC, but there are NO contact emails given. They obviously don't want to be contacted - I wonder why. MP 'passed on' my comments, I never got a reply.
The public (all of us) are paying for this.

 

[Drago]

My issue is with white paint man.

Why paint a white ring around a pot hole, then bugger off and leave it so long the pot hole grows and swallows all traces of the white paint? What is the point of that?

 

[classic33]

I'd agree with kynikos except for the following reasons:-
A 'team' look at the hole and decide if action is required, maybe they white-mark it (I'd hope it doesn't take another visit!)
Another 'team' come along and fill it badly
Another 'team' come along and fill it again.... and again..... and again.
Or they just ignore holes that are VERY DANGEROUS by
a) closing the report
b) Saying they will fill it within 12 weeks (unbelievable)
c) IMPORTANTLY...... insisting that the public decide if it is 'dangerous and likely to cause injury' and then the reporter has a choice
1) Wait 50 minutes on the phone in a queue and then after it is recorded the report is immediately closed and notification sent via a NOREPLY email
2) Try to report via online, which is only possible for non-dangerous potholes, thus it doesn't go into the serious category that it should.
Unbelievably Buckinghamshire Council (where I've reported some horrendous holes still present since January) are STILL using the excuse 'During cold weather the road surface can break, which gives us pothole problems' Yeah, it was chilly in June.

A pitiful service from those who are paid good money to DO THE JOB ONCE PROPERLY instead of multiple times, which must cost even more in the long-run. It would be understandable except for the bare-faced cheek and lies they give when someone does come a cropper.
One of the potholes Bucks CC were told about received an additional report saying
A Mercedes with a flat tyre has been 'dumped' outside ladies house (this was right near the huge pothole that I and many others reported)
Yes you've guessed it........
Council reply...... "we'll send along an inspector, and if it looks like the car has been abandoned we'll take action to remove it"
So......... Pothole causes wrecked tyre, owner then has to pay to get car out of Council compound!
An absolute disgraceful way to run a 'business' - If this wasn't a public service (laugh) people would be sacked and never employed again.

I've tried to make my feelings known to the 'higher up' in Cambridge CC, but there are NO contact emails given. They obviously don't want to be contacted - I wonder why. MP 'passed on' my comments, I never got a reply.
The public (all of us) are paying for this.

Try Chief Executive, Stephen Moir at
Stephen.Moir@Cambridgeshire.gov.uk
Or head of legal
Emma.Duncan@Cambridgeshire.gov.uk

 

[Gillstay]

I've tried to make my feelings known to the 'higher up' in Cambridge CC, but there are NO contact emails given. They obviously don't want to be contacted - I wonder why. MP 'passed on' my comments, I never got a reply.
The public (all of us) are paying for this.

No, we are not paying. Same as the health service. We have decided we want stuff on the cheap and so we have got it. We voted for the current state of affairs.

 

[Fastpedaller]

No, we are not paying. Same as the health service. We have decided we want stuff on the cheap and so we have got it. We voted for the current state of affairs.

I don't remember any council outlining how they intended (or not) to maintain the roads. Even if they had, I'm sure they wouldn't stick to what they've said.

 

[Fastpedaller]

Try Chief Executive, Stephen Moir at
Stephen.Moir@Cambridgeshire.gov.uk
Or head of legal
Emma.Duncan@Cambridgeshire.gov.uk

Thanks for that, I shall try the two email above.

 

[classic33]

Thanks for that, I shall try the two email above.

Anything sent to them will probably be opened by someone else, before it's passed back down for someone else to deal with.
Things seldom get passed upwards though.

 

[Gillstay]

I don't remember any council outlining how they intended (or not) to maintain the roads. Even if they had, I'm sure they wouldn't stick to what they've said.

Funds also come from central government. You must realise that.

 

[Drago]

No, we are not paying. Same as the health service. We have decided we want stuff on the cheap and so we have got it. We voted for the current state of affairs.

Yet when someone's front fence or hedge is 10cm higher than permissible there's always staff to enforce it ruthlessly, and staff have enough time on their hands to create new by-laws regarding dogs that duplicates existing criminal law that is already largely un-enforced, or to get heavy with people who have painted their front door an unapproved colour.

Oh, there is plenty of money and resources when it suits the carncils.

The issue is with highways is that the role is almost always contracted out to big companies like Kier, and the budget is set in stone for the year- the less Kier (or whoever) spend, the more they can pocket at the end of it. The cure for that is political so I won't go there, but therein lies the issue with highways maintenance, at least on LA maintained roads.

Major roads, as bad as they can sometimes be, have a different funding arrangement with contractors engaged usually for a particular task or project rather than to manage who whole show, and as a consequence they tend to be maintained to a better standard, although that isn't a solid rule.

 

[Fastpedaller]

I find it frustrating (and more so than it used to be) that whoever is doing the job seems to be only doing it (if indeed they make any attempt) to the lowest possible standard, rather than aiming to do a good job. Some of it is so poorly done, that a rank amateur could do better.

 

[kynikos]

I find it frustrating (and more so than it used to be) that whoever is doing the job seems to be only doing it (if indeed they make any attempt) to the lowest possible standard, rather than aiming to do a good job. Some of it is so poorly done, that a rank amateur could do better.

Possibly because whoever is doing the job is a rank amateur?

The amount employers invest in training per employee has fallen 28% since 2005, with UK employers investing only half the EU average per worker. Investment by many firms is limited to statutory requirements like health and safety.

Here's an example: I had a new kitchen fitted and the "plumber" fitted the taps the wrong way round, hot where the cold should be and vice versa. When I pointed this out I was assured it was "OK, because there's no agreed standard for which way round they go."