Potholes - How do we enforce repair under S41 Highways Act

[simongt]

There was a wee pothole in our road for some time. Eventually, it was 'half filled', so either the bod ran out of filler stuff, or simply couldn't be arsed to do the job properly.
Any bets - ?

 

[Drago]

There was a wee pothole in our road for some time. Eventually, it was 'half filled', so either the bod ran out of filler stuff, or simply couldn't be arsed to do the job properly.
Any bets - ?

Maybe the pothole straddled the county line, so o ly thr half that belonged to the workman's employer got filled?

 

[classic33]

Your right it is our money that the council uses, and I am quite happy that they are doing their best with limited resources.
Also I find that badgering councils only ensures they cannot get work done as they have to answer the few people who use up a lot of resources.

If no-one tells them the work hasn't yet been done, they'll assume it has been.
Too many departments not telling other departments what they have/haven't yet done. If the different departments actually started talking to each other, there'd be less duplication of much of the paperwork.
I want to report a road defect to the council, I've to make the complaint to health and safety. Who may, or may not pass the complaint onto highways. They, highways, assuming they get told, will then pass it onto a contractor who will just add it to a list. The initial complaint soon gets "lost" and it's easy to see why.

 

[Drago]

Your right it is our money that the council uses, and I am quite happy that they are doing their best with limited resources.
Also I find that badgering councils only ensures they cannot get work done as they have to answer the few people who use up a lot of resources.

Yet the companies they give the highways contracts to are able to make a nice profit out of those limited resources, so things can't be that tight.

The councils have a lawful duty, there is no legal excuse they can give for not discharging that duty that would be a defence in court.

Similarly the highways contractors are contractually bound to discharge those duties on behalf of their client.

Resources be damned - there is simply no legal, ethical or moral excuse for not maintaining the roads to a degree that renders them safe for all users.

 

[bonzobanana]

There is something like £10 Trillion of debt now in the UK when you add everything together including government debt, Bank of England liabilities and pension shortfalls. It's about £150k on every single person's head and the government is still adding to the pile. At some point we will probably need an IMF bailout and have severe restrictions placed on our economy. The way the economy has been handled for the last 50 years is complete madness. We are on the road to hitting rock bottom when hopefully we will finally come to our senses and come up with a economic recovery package but it will be painful for at least another 50 years such is the level of debt to be repayed.

Many councils are facing bankruptcy and cannot provide the services they once did. Many also borrowed huge sums and cannot afford the repayments.

We aren't alone in this huge level of debt, many countries like the USA, France, Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain etc have similar issues. We are probably the worst example with regard selling national assets and now being the most foreign owned country nowadays.

https://www.taxpayersalliance.com/picture_real_national_debt_hits_143_000_per_person

However as negative as this all is we certainly have the tools to recover as we did after WW2. We just need to get away from fantasy idealist politics and understand we must get back to a trading surplus and live within our means. We need to focus on increasing exports and limiting imports and not just giving away money which is utter madness.

 

[Emanresu]

As @bonzobanana says. Simply put there is not enough money - for various reasons.

The there is a Local Government Ombudsman you can complain to, who ought to be able to persuade a council to do things they should be doing. They publish a list of decisions. Even they have given up on potholes

https://www.lgo.org.uk/decisions/transport-and-highways/highway-repair-and-maintenance/23-009-695

 

[Drago]

Many councils are facing bankruptcy and cannot provide the services they once did. Many also borrowed huge sums and cannot afford the repayments.

Our council was superb. Provided excellent services within budget, and had formed a strategic alliance with another such adjacent council in the next county. Even the council tax wasn't too bad.

All was good, everyone was happy. Proof if could be done if intelligence and prudence were in ample supply and petty political bickering kept at arms length from the actual business of service delivery.

Then they were forcibly merged with a failing council in our own county. The external strategic partner saw which way that would head and pulled out of the arrangement, and now our services are being dragged down and it seems possible that we'll be dragged into bankruptcy too.

So it can be done and done successfully, our original council was proof of that. They were managing very well within their budget. However, infecting successful councils with a cancer from a failing neighbour by forcibly merging them isn't the way to fix it.

Councils received a massive income hike in the 90s when rates gave way to council tax, with a brief stint of the PT in the middle. That increase has rarely been used wisely, and examples abound of financial and business ineptitude. That fact that there is a tranche of decent, well run councils providing effective services within budget shows that it can be done all over the UK, and that others fail to do so is down to three decades of mismanagement, not the income squeeze of recent years.

The failing councils almost universally have one thing in common. I won't use the P word, but it's their bickering, infighting, and insistence on ideology that brings them down.

Here's a question every elected councillor should ask themselves - "how does what I am about to do make a direct contribution to service delivery?" If the answer is not unabiguously positive then they should not do it. Read some council meeting minutes and you'll see why many are run so inefficiently, and it's little to do with the absolute budget itself.

Short of money? Then how can you afford fact finding trips to other councils or even abroad? How can you afford to pay contractors to manage service and take a 30% cut as profit? How can you vote a significant increase in councillors expense allowances? How can you waste 30 grand of a Christmas tree? How can you risk public money hjgh-risk investment funds that increasingly are failing to give the expected return?

Heres a good one. On my old beat, which was in the failed council area, they were ripping out old lamp posts and replacing them with new ones with a hinge that can be lowered to the ground, thus allowing serving and repair without the need for a ladder. I got chatting to a manager at one site and asked why they were doing it.

"Health and safety", was his reply.

"Oh, have you had folk falling off the ladders while changing the bulbs?"

"I've been with the department since 1959 and we don't have any records of a single injury received while up a ladder repairing a lighting column, but apprently its dangerous so we've been ordered to replace them all. "

Heaven save us from politicians.

 

[Fastpedaller]

As @bonzobanana says. Simply put there is not enough money - for various reasons.

The there is a Local Government Ombudsman you can complain to, who ought to be able to persuade a council to do things they should be doing. They publish a list of decisions. Even they have given up on potholes

https://www.lgo.org.uk/decisions/transport-and-highways/highway-repair-and-maintenance/23-009-695

Ok if you have the means, like Rod Stewart, but for most of us it's too expensive.

https://www.bing.com/videos/rivervi...22EC2AEBBA987E671D7522EC2AEBBA987E6&FORM=VIRE
Good luck to him, and the Council probably won't take action against him, because he'll be able to finance a fight. The rest of us just have to fall down the holes!

 

[Hacienda71]

I was in a meeting at my local town hall in circa 2010. The highways contractor for our LA was there. I had a bit of a moan as the local roads were starting to deteriorate. They openly admitted they did not have sufficient funding to maintain the roads and it was going to be a fire fighting exercise. All part of austerity.
Roll on 10 years and I ended up in hospital for a week with a broken ribs and pelvis after hitting one of numerous pot holes on the stretch of road I was on.
Were the local authority to blame. Apparently not.

It makes my blood boil.

 

[Gillstay]

I was in a meeting at my local town hall in circa 2010. The highways contractor for our LA was there. I had a bit of a moan as the local roads were starting to deteriorate. They openly admitted they did not have sufficient funding to maintain the roads and it was going to be a fire fighting exercise. All part of austerity.
Roll on 10 years and I ended up in hospital for a week with a broken ribs and pelvis after hitting one of numerous pot holes on the stretch of road I was on.
Were the local authority to blame. Apparently not.

It makes my blood boil.

Blimey and your in a wealthy area. I can understand you being upset.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

I was in a meeting at my local town hall in circa 2010. The highways contractor for our LA was there. I had a bit of a moan as the local roads were starting to deteriorate. They openly admitted they did not have sufficient funding to maintain the roads and it was going to be a fire fighting exercise. All part of austerity.
Roll on 10 years and I ended up in hospital for a week with a broken ribs and pelvis after hitting one of numerous pot holes on the stretch of road I was on.
Were the local authority to blame. Apparently not.

It makes my blood boil.

This is why everyone needs to report them
They have a maximum time to fix it from the point where it is reported
if someone gets injured after that timer has run out then they are liable and it costs them lots
If no-one has reported it then they are no liable as they didn't know

They have to keep an accurate record of exactly when a pothole was reported (yes - I know) and if you try to sue them then you (or your lawyer) can ask for this to check it

I suppose that if it was reported via "fixmystreet.com" then you could also ask them if they have records


Hence - we all need to report then as soon s they are seen - either via the relevant counsel website - or via fixmystreet

 

[Hacienda71]

I did think about having a report a pothole ride once a month where I forego my normal ride and ride looking for and reporting every pothole I see.

I also got a solicitor to challenge the council, not because I ever thought I would get compensation, but to put them on notice that there had been an accident requiring hospitalisation on the roads they are supposed to be maintaining. Personally the prove the pothole existed for me is a joke. There are so many that it is a lottery if the one that takes you out has been recorded. There should be a legal duty of care to maintain the roads in an acceptable condition.

Apologies if I am ranting, but it does wind me up. 😡

 

[Fastpedaller]

I did think about having a report a pothole ride once a month where I forego my normal ride and ride looking for and reporting every pothole I see.

I also got a solicitor to challenge the council, not because I ever thought I would get compensation, but to put them on notice that there had been an accident requiring hospitalisation on the roads they are supposed to be maintaining. Personally the prove the pothole existed for me is a joke. There are so many that it is a lottery if the one that takes you out has been recorded. There should be a legal duty of care to maintain the roads in an acceptable condition.

Apologies if I am ranting, but it does wind me up. 😡

I too find it unacceptable. They say 'please report any potholes to us' and then close reports and do nothing about the holes. If challenged in the event of a claim they insist 'we didn't know about the pothole, nobody told us' and then state 'we make regular checks on all roads, the frequency of checks depends on the class and usage of road'. So surely the logical conclusion (if there are potholes in said road) is either they haven't checked it or the frequency of checking isn't correct! I thought Norfolk CC were pretty poor (can be sometimes good, but some holes left 8 years!) but Cambridge CC is unbelievable in their arrogance and dismissive stance. Over 80 complaints about potholes on one roundabout (one crater must have been 400mm deep! ) and over a year to fix just isn't acceptable. I also followed the CC website guidance and informed the Police (Council offices closed) and Police didn't want to know either - So nobody in authority had enough backbone to take responsibility.

 

[Alex321]

There should be a legal duty of care to maintain the roads in an acceptable condition.

There IS a legal duty of care to do so - as Fastpedaller pointed out in the opening post of the thread, it is Section 41 of the Highways Act 1980.

Unfortunately, while there is that duty of care, there are no criminal offences defined for failing to carry out that duty, and there doesn't seem to be any overseeing body that could require them to do so, it is up to individuals to apply for court orders for that.

 

[Fastpedaller]

Interestingly for both Norfolk CC and Cambridge CC (others are possibly the same) extra checks are made on main roads (used predominantly by motor vehicles) compared to minor roads (the type frequented by cyclists). Could it be that a case could be fought on the basis that more frequent checks are required on minor roads because they are used by vulnerable users who don't have car tyres with 90mm side walls?