Page 9 of 9

Re: Off the Bike

Posted: 1 Aug 2009, 8:50pm
by Mick F
Yeah fine, thank you Ted.
Thanks for asking.

I know this thread has been going a year, and I know it's a bit long, but I really do feel that it's a good record of what happens after a prang and the hoops you have to jump through.

Hopefully, my next post on here will be to say something of what's been going on in Solicitor Land for these past few months.

Re: Off the Bike

Posted: 6 Aug 2009, 9:53am
by byegad
Hope you get well soon Mick.
I imagine you have a good case for repairs paid by the relevant council. A friend did some thing similar on his multi thousand pound racing bike a few years ago. The council solicitors insisted he get a quote for his several hundred pound wheels to be repaired. The LBS quoted ove rdouble the original cost so they bought him new ones.

Re: Off the Bike

Posted: 26 Nov 2009, 7:47am
by Mick F
I received a letter from Russell Jones and Walker yesterday.

They've dropped the case. :(

Basically, after consultation and deep thought, they feel that they cannot pursue Cornwall County Council. Despite the evidence supplied, they do not believe a Court would obligate a Council to carry out more than a monthly inspection regime even if heavy rains had come. They note my comments, but still maintain that the Section 58 Defence will be met.

Oh well.

They add that I could take the case further with other solicitors, but I think I'll give up now.

Re: Off the Bike

Posted: 26 Nov 2009, 10:25am
by gaz
Mick F wrote:They've dropped the case. :( ...I think I'll give up now.

Sorry to hear that. You are not alone. Been there, done that, had the repair bills to prove it.

Edit 29 April 2012.

I heard some interesting remarks yesterday form a highwayman regarding the "Section 58" defence.

Once a pothole is reported the Highway Authority prioritise it according to it's severity and location. If an accident occurs after a pothole has been reported they may still maintain a "Section 58" defence if they feel that they prioritised their action to "cone off" the fault or repair it correctly.

If a "Section 58" defence is not appropriate then they will not automatically accept liability. The HC advises people to drive (or ride) at a speed whereby they can stop for unexpected hazards. It's hard to argue with that.
Highway Code Rule 154 wrote:Be prepared for pedestrians, horse riders, cyclists, slow-moving farm vehicles or mud on the road surface. Make sure you can stop within the distance you can see to be clear.

His own experience is that 85% of all pothole related claims fail.