Cycling UK Forum

I was cycling home last night and came of my bike due to the road. I have a racing bike with thin tyres which funnily enough was checked 2 days ago.

Anyway at speed just outside of work I hit what is best described as a channel of about 2-3cm width that runs along the road with a depth of about 3-5cms.

It is like the top layer of tarmac has shrunk in sections and created these cracks/channels. because of this I came of and went over the handlebars and hit my head full on, bleeding from my ear and head, I was rushed to hospital and given morphine for the pain and a immediate CT scan and xrays, CT was clear thank god but have a fractured collar bone, marks, cuts grazes all over and bruised ribs.

My question is are these splits in the road of this size deemed potholes? or damage as such that needs repairing. I am in a lot of pain and it was scary and I know if these were not there I would not be in the situation I am in now havbing time off work loosing money and in pain.

Hi, and welcome to the forum!

I've just approved your post, but you had a duplicate there too, so I took the liberty of deleting it. It confuses people if there are two identical threads at the same time!

Thanks Mick, much appreaciated. Was too dosed up that I did not see there was an approval of threads messages. Saw it the second time I posted, apologies for the duplicate of work and thanks for the welcome

Ouch, hope you have a speedy recovery.

Lots of info here following on from Mick F's own close encounter.

Take photos of your injuries, damage to bike and, if you can, the road defect. Then get legal advice. It can be a long battle to get redress which you may not win.

Keep all receipts for costs incurred and evidence of your loss of earnings.

Might be worth getting a colleague to get photos of the road defect before it is "coincidentally repaired"

The only problem I can forsee is that since it hasn't been repaired since you reported it then the council must deem it below the threshold for repair and that's probably the same threshold for a claim to be considered.

Thanks for the replies guys, I have not reported it as yet as I have not had a chance, will probably do it on Monday. Not sure if it has been reported.

The area is a industrial estate non private and has a lot of HGV traffic and lots of vehicles who park up for the night so the road gets lots of use

If the local authority have (a) been doing inspections properly and (b) haven't been notified of the road defect, I doubt that you'll get compensation.

http://www.fillthathole.org.uk/ is a site for reporting potholes. You can check if a report has already been made, and report this problem (under "Hazards", "Map", top-left). But I suggest you get photos before reporting.

snibgo wrote:If the local authority have (a) been doing inspections properly and (b) haven't been notified of the road defect, I doubt that you'll get compensation.

http://www.fillthathole.org.uk/ is a site for reporting potholes. You can check if a report has already been made, and report this problem (under "Hazards", "Map", top-left). But I suggest you get photos before reporting.

Thank you for that

I should also have welcomed you to the forum, and expressed my sympathy. Sorry I didn't; I've been getting my posts confused!

It's clear to me, but not to local authorities, that they should maintain roads in a condition that they are safe for cyclists. They seem to be more bothered about broken car springs than injured cyclists.

If you are a CTC member, I suggest you talk to their lawyers.

When photographing the site, take particular note of any lines painted around the hole. These would suggest that the authority knew about it.

wirral_cyclist wrote:The only problem I can forsee is that since it hasn't been repaired since you reported it then the council must deem it below the threshold for repair and that's probably the same threshold for a claim to be considered.

Could a tarmac damage actually be deemed below the threshold for repair, when a crashed bicyclist has been picked up by ambulance at the site? I understand from the OP that this was what happened.

Apparently LAs squirm like the squirmiest things alive.

A good thread (viewtopic.php?f=7&t=49423) was started by "lycra looney" who seemed to be in a claims department, saying that LAs maintained roads for cars, not cyclists. If a cyclist was injured by a bad road, tough luck.

I can't see any legal justification for this. If a pothole injures a cyclist and the LA knew (or should have known) of the danger, it should pay up. But I am not a lawyer.

zerobuttons wrote:

wirral_cyclist wrote:The only problem I can forsee is that since it hasn't been repaired since you reported it then the council must deem it below the threshold for repair and that's probably the same threshold for a claim to be considered.

Could a tarmac damage actually be deemed below the threshold for repair, when a crashed bicyclist has been picked up by ambulance at the site? I understand from the OP that this was what happened.

It was suggested by an insider that local authorities are unaware of any vehicle type other than those with at least one wheel at each of the four corners (sorry tadpole riders) and so as a matter of course they refute claims by cyclists, cycle club scuttlebutt is that the oft quoted claims rebuttal is 'you should have seen it at bike speeds' and 'you ride that route every day' and suchlike! - wriggling tactics that probably works in lots of cases - sadly.
Maintenance would of course be cheaper than paying out.

From the facts that you provide, you have a strong claim. There is no need for the police or CPS to take action for your (civil) personal injury claim to suceed, although a conviction is always helpful.

Before any decision is taken on liability, the police report (and any photographs) needs to be obtained as well as good photographs and a plan obtained of the accident scene. Also, check to see if there is any CCTV that might have recorded the accident. You can then only wait and consider the car driver's response on liability and any allegations they (the insurers) may make on contributory negligence. Much will depend on the factual circumstances at the time; that is the position of you and the car driver and speeds.

Ongoing photographs of scarring are always useful, although as scarring can take 12 - 24 months to settle, you will need professional photographs taken at that time. The visibility of the scarring at conversation distance is a key factor in determining the level of compensation.

Good luck.

filiasphil wrote:From the facts that you provide, you have a strong claim. There is no need for the police or CPS to take action for your (civil) personal injury claim to suceed, although a conviction is always helpful.

Before any decision is taken on liability, the police report (and any photographs) needs to be obtained as well as good photographs and a plan obtained of the accident scene. Also, check to see if there is any CCTV that might have recorded the accident. You can then only wait and consider the car driver's response on liability and any allegations they (the insurers) may make on contributory negligence. Much will depend on the factual circumstances at the time; that is the position of you and the car driver and speeds.

Ongoing photographs of scarring are always useful, although as scarring can take 12 - 24 months to settle, you will need professional photographs taken at that time. The visibility of the scarring at conversation distance is a key factor in determining the level of compensation.

Good luck.

What car driver? This was a pothole with no other vehicle involved.