are Warwickshire Council negligent...

[02GF74]

Well done by movingthe signs - obviously you know the road and its problem better than some buysbody in the council office but you should not have admitted to moving them. Had there been another crash, who is to say that in our age of no win no fee compensation culture you would not be sued.?

 

[swansonj]

Reg's point is 100 percent valid. No competent driver should ever lose their vehicle off a road, with no external factors, markings or not, 90 bend, 10 degree bend or 180 degree bend. It's driving basics.

That said, there are more than a few less than competent drivers out there that would do just that, so if the council could take proportionate steps to reduce risk, perhaps they should. Yes, there is certainly an argument that the overriding issue is improving driving standards, but that's a fairly well accepted point on these forums anyway.

If Reg had confined himself to pointing out that no amount of poor road design takes the responsibility away from the driver, then he would have been 100% valid. But of course, being Reg, he didn't just do that, he couched it in unnecessarily oppositional terms by saying that it wasn't the council's fault. Fault is not either/or (except in the minds of people who prefer argument to understanding) and the council can be at fault without implying that the driver is not at fault.

 

[buggi]

Well done by movingthe signs - obviously you know the road and its problem better than some buysbody in the council office but you should not have admitted to moving them. Had there been another crash, who is to say that in our age of no win no fee compensation culture you would not be sued.?

technically i didn't move them, i pulled them out a ditch and propped them up Its the least of my worries to be honest, i'd happily stand up in court and say my piece. plus you can't get blood out of a stone.. i ain't go no money for them to sue me over! ha ha

but on another note... this is an interesting google view. turns out there did used to be signs where i've now put them. obviously they have been taken out on a previous occasion. In this photo you can see two sets of arrows, one immediately ahead, and one just tucked around the corner. the ones immediately ahead no longer exist, the ones tucked around the corner have obviously been moved further around the corner when they were replaced sometime, as i can tell you they are not normally this visible from this place in the road, you need to be a bit closer to the corner.

but the ones tucked around the corner are now pretty much in the place where the ones are that are now missing. (except they are on the ground becuase i didn't have a spade on me to rebury the poles). i think i'll be making a further call to the council. (try and imagine that corner in the pitch black with no arrows)

 

[mattobrien]

I'm firmly in the driving appropriate to conditions side of the argument. You can go as fast as you can see and that is all. Go any faster and we know who is to blame...

 

[buggi]

also, yes the driver does have some responsibility but are you telling me when you were young and had just passed your test, you didn't at sometime misjudge something and had a "fook me, that was close" moment. No one is skilled when they pass their test (unfortunately), it takes experience to become competent and how would you feel if you sent your kid off to college and you got a call the next day to say they were in hospital.

I'm a cyclist (as its quite obvious) so i'm no fan of bad driving but i'm no fan of bad road design either. There is a college here and a few of the younguns have had accidents on this road. No one likes the fact their irresponsible, young, foolish but no one wants to see flowers on the side of the road. that said, its not just the inexperienced that are putting their cars in the ditch.

 

[dellzeqq]

I haven't read Reg's comment, but my guess is that he is talking out of his fundament.

The Council has designed the means by which the risk can be reduced - note, reduced and not eliminated.

The Council has a duty to maintain the road, and, in this sense, the road includes the designed risk reduction measures.

They haven't discharged that duty.

If someone, driving in a manner that a court would deem reasonable, crashes, they Council's arse is in a sling.

See also cyclists and reported potholes.

Having said that............emotionally I'm on the side of the Council. If people can't read the road, they shouldn't be driving. (Later edit) Buggi puts it much more eloquently than I

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I'm firmly in the driving appropriate to conditions side of the argument. You can go as fast as you can see and that is all. Go any faster and we know who is to blame...

Really though? Is that reasonable? Is that blameworthy?

Many drivers, for instance, turn left at junctions off main roads in towns without slowing sufficiently to allow them to see. Many drivers, for instance, drive down country lanes at night faster than they can see as they assume anything in front of them travelling in the same direction is most likely also travelling in excess of the speed limit. Many drivers, for instance, enter roundabouts unable to see their exit clearly nor see if it is clear. And before we get all smug and pious many cyclists ride in very similar ways around other vulnerable road users. Or is that all just a Sussex thing?

Driving requires a whole stack of unconscious assumptions about likely outcomes of certain actions to be made otherwise we'd be back with the man with a red flag and they all be going everywhere at 5mph.

not that I'd mind that. nor a removal of all road signs and road markings in rural areas. nor blanket 20mph limits where people live. nor £2 a litre extra tax on fuel. nor £1000 per year VED. nor conversion of all existing mph speed limits to kph.

but I'm a member of the cycling taliban. i don't hate drivers, I just hate their addiction to cars.

 

[BimblingBee]

Well done of on your community minded spirit. I'm not sure I'd call the council negligent, surely the only person who is negligent is someone who is driving to fast for the road conditions and ends up in a ditch?

Where does it stop? Does the council have to fill the ditch in or put barriers around it? Where we live we get probably one or 2 crashes a week on a 5 mile stretch due to people going to fast. Most are damage only but we get a few serious and the odd fatal thrown in. It's just part of living in a rural area with slippery, bendy roads and something that you will get used to.

If it wasn't that corner it would be another one. Councils have enough to worry about and although they do waste alot of money, personally I'd rather they put the money towards something more useful than chevrons warning people of corners!

 

[sheddy]

Can you email the councillors and county councillors representing that ward and copy in the MP ?
If no response write to the local rag with a photo.

 

[buggi]

i can see where you're coming from with driver responsibility... but i do feel its not right to set a 50mph speed limit, and then no warning of a 90 degree bend when the road is not lit. when you're on a road that is set at 50mph, you don't expect a 90 degree bend.

you are correct in stating if it wasn't that corner, it would be another. This is the case... don't get me started on the next one 100 yards away (which turns 90 degrees the other way). This one looks like a T junction, when in fact the road turns left with a "right turn" that looks like its going straight on... many people have shot straight across it without realising. The only solution here, i feel, is to change it to a T Junction, but that's another thread! LOL As it happens they've usually scared themselves shitless on the first bend so are already being more careful.. but there's still the odd one that either carreers across or ditches themselves here too..

but anyway... like i said, roads that this speed limit don't usually have what is practically a dead end. This is why, for once, and once only, i'm on the side of the driver.

 

[swee'pea99]

To me, the answer to the OP's question is absolutely. Negligent at best. That's clearly a potentially very dangerous corner. That's why we have chevrons: precisely to mark corners like that one. I don't know what baffles me more, the council's apparent reluctance to put chevrons where they clearly can and ought to be, or some posters' eagerness to exonerate them and point the finger at drivers.

 

[buggi]

here you are, i think this pretty much proves my point.

http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=6109688

as you can see... the road is pretty much straight right up until the last two bends, and i've just checked the speed limit and it is, in fact, National Speed Limit (which is 60mph on a single carriageway is it not?). so there you are driving down a nice straight road at 60 mph for a mile and a half... and then suddenly you are greeted with no less than a 90 degree bend to the right... and no warning until you're on top of it.

You see my point?

If the original chevrons were put back (like where they are now propped up) you can clearly see them on approach and modify your speed. If they put them back around the corner, i feel it will not be too long until there is a fatality.

In fact, i feel so strongly about it now, particularly with the "evidence" i have uncovered that there used to be signs here, that i'm going to write a very strong letter to the council and i'm also going to tell them that next time there is a crash i am going to inform the driver that i reported it.

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

Yes, Warwickshire County Council are negligent, or no road guidance is needed anywhere. However, as I am becoming more and more acutely aware, when councils are under pressure, instead of getting the most competent, price-efficient staff to provide the best possible service, it's the stonewallers who survive.

Would a stone wall help? The council could do that.

 

[buggi]

Yes, Warwickshire County Council are negligent, or no road guidance is needed anywhere. However, as I am becoming more and more acutely aware, when councils are under pressure, instead of getting the most competent, price-efficient staff to provide the best possible service, it's the stonewallers who survive.

Would a stone wall help? The council could do that.

erm... i think the ditch may be better LOL

 

[swee'pea99]

When you write to the council - and well done for doing so - who not mention that given their past unresponsiveness and your strong conviction that every moment's delay represents a very real risk to people's lives, if they don't get back to you with a reasonable response within, say, a week, you will send a copy of the letter and a brief summary of the background, to the makers of Top Gear. And if they don't, do.

They're always on the lookout for good 'issues' to cover, and may well be interested in doing a feature on who exactly is responsible for taking appropriate measures to safeguard people using the roads. I doubt anyone at the council would be keen to even risk being flagged up on national tv as having ignored repeated warnings and five accidents, one fatal, and failed to provide a safe environment for the public at large.