[Closed] Pot hole claim

Salford council claim form

You'll have an invoice for parts, plus your time at less than market rates.

You'll need to show they've not acted reasonably in allowing the potholes to be there of course.

Martin Lewis has a guide

Clicky

When I worked alongside the highways team, they would only pay out if the pothole has been previously reported, or they could not prove a reasonable inspection regime. They paid out on a very small proportion of all claims. This may have changed, I'm going back 15 years.

https://www.salford.gov.uk/parking-roads-and-travel/roads/make-a-claim-for-damage-or-loss/

Alternatively, if you wish to deal with this matter independently, we will require a letter from your insurers confirming that they are not dealing with your claim. A letter from your insurers is a mandatory requirement set by the council to detect and prevent fraud.

I think in small claims legal cases you can charge your time at minimum wage hourly rate to avoid any counter arguments that your charging too much for your labour, so I'd probably base your time costs on that to ensure they can't argue you're taking the mick.

And be aware that some insurance companies will take this an accident. That’s how my wife lost her no-claims discount…

Alternatively, if you wish to deal with this matter independently, we will require a letter from your insurers confirming that they are not dealing with your claim. A letter from your insurers is a mandatory requirement set by the council to detect and prevent fraud.

Ironic, as that would fraudulently prevent legitimate claims.

We successfully claimed in Birmingham yeaes ago for pothole damage to Mrs Pondo's old Panda - if I can find the thread, I'll post a link.

Ironic, as that would fraudulently prevent legitimate claims.

We successfully claimed in Birmingham yeaes ago for pothole damage to Mrs Pondo’s old Panda – if I can find the thread, I’ll post a link.

Yeah, just because they say it, doesnt make it true - I suspect it's worded like that to deter people.
I'd think along the lines of what a small claims court case would require.

The general process is designed to make people give up and move on. It will take ages.

The general process is designed to make people give up and move on. It will take ages.

Yeah thats why I suggested the OP base his costs on what a small claims court would allow as reasonable, and that the defendent has no way to turn around and call it an unreasonable ammount.

If the council don't play ball then its a letter before action and file a small claims case 30 days after.

*I realise its not technically called small claims court anymore, but the same principals apply.

I don’t want the insurance to see it as an incident.

The cost of the part was £20 my time was about 1 hour of labour so at an average price £50.

The claim total would be £70, I know it’s not much but it would be nice to have in my pocket as it was very much down to the road being in very bad condition.

In that case I don't think it's really worth persuing unless the council roll over easily - the admin and effort (for me anyway) wouldn't be worth it.

Of course they know this, so make you jump through hoops until you can't be arsed any more.

How hard did you hit it to break a (good condition)shock top mount.

I'd expect to loose teeth before it broke if it was in good condition prior.

How hard did you hit it to break a (good condition)shock top mount.

I’d expect to loose teeth before it broke if it was in good condition prior.

I'm guessing it just smashed the bump-stop /bush, as it only needed £20 in parts? although I suupose you could technically argue that it needs a new spring and shock after a very hard hit, but if you've not replaced that, than you can't claim for that.

Good luck.
I bent two alloys on a pot hole a couple of years ago - council made it very difficult to claim and I got nothing.
For example, if your suspension top mount broke they might argue that it was knackered already!

This was fun to revisit...

https://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/pothole-punctures-and-claiming-off-the-council/

I think two things clinched it for us - that the pothole had already been reported, and that the road had been flooded for some time, so the council had either neglected to fulfil their obligation to inspect roads within 7 days of flooding (or somesuch - it was a long time ago!) or that they had inspected it znd singularly failed to make good its condition.

On the other hand…

You drove into a big hole and want someone else / the council to pay for the damage…? May I suggest not driving into big holes in the first place.

Just count yourself lucky that you could fix it yourself, report the hole and move on.

You drove into a big hole and want someone else / the council to pay for the damage…? May I suggest not driving into big holes in the first place.

That's exactly the sort of unhelpful judgemental sanctimonious bullshit that popped up from time to time in my thread seven years ago, good to see we've moved on. 🙂

The whole lane was pot holed and the tarmac was breaking up, avoiding said pot holes would have involved veering into another lane.

Edit: sorry the driving Gods of stw would have seen the pot holed area of road a mile away and therefore planned a different route to avoid it

May I suggest not driving into big holes in the first place.

Far better to swerve across the lane to find the unpotholed surface, other road users will just make way for you of course.

Man oh man, the more time you spend on this forum the more dickheads come out of the woodwork.

I claimed for a tyre a few years back, followed a process I found online, it all went through and I got full payout in the end, but the mainreason it took a long time seemed to be the council’s process of farming it out to their insurance company. And we know how long insurance companies take to do anything…. It is worth sticking with it, I reckon.

I just find the whole “I’ve done something daft and want someone else to pay for it” a bit tiresome and far too common these days.

What’s wrong with slowing down, and carefully navigating around it? Would you also kick up a fuss and blame the council if you drove through a deep puddle and ripped your front bumper off?

I am being judgemental here, the pot hole could have been obscured with wet leaves or similar and I’m sure under the same conditions I probably would have crashed through it too. It’s not the councils fault though.

Check on Fixmystreet.com to see if the holes had been reported. all reports to them are forwarded to the council and displayed on their website.

For £20 I'd be letting that go (You won't be getting £50 for an hour's DIY). If you make a claim and don't tell your insurance then you are opening up potential issues later, and if you do tell them then it'll probably cost more than £20.

If you make a claim and don’t tell your insurance then you are opening up potential issues later

Seriously?

Seriously?

Yes. It'll be buried in the T&Cs of your insurance somewhere. They expect you to tell them about any accidents. By having an accident and especially making a claim, albeit against a third party, you will be pushing up your risk category. Probably nothing will come of it but it is a risk.

Check on Fixmystreet.com to see if the holes had been reported

Some councils (Fife for example) don't accept reports from 3rd party sites.

Essentially you need to demonstrate two things
1. That you’ve incurred loss, and value of the loss
2. That they’re responsible for the loss.
Whilst they may promote a particular process they have for claims, they're still subject to civil court claims like everybody else.

The first one seems quite straightforward, considering you’re only claiming £70 and a majority of that is parts (do you also need to claim the recovery fee), and you’ve also got dashcam footage.
The second one is made relatively straightforward because the 1980 highways act places a strong liability on the authority to maintain the highway. In this case, a photograph showing the pothole is deeper than 40mm should be sufficient, alternatively, the dashcam footage might be sufficient. Having evidence that you were driving reasonably/slowly and the vehicle was beforehand in good condition could also help. I’ve not heard about this proof of no insurance claim thing before – perhaps I am out of date, but I don’t see how it is their business to verify this.
The three ways they could avoid a successful claim are to either a) be generally difficult and hope you give up (process etc). b) argue a defence that they did not previously know about the pothole as it had not been previously reported, and had only recently occurred so hasn’t been picked up by routine inspections, or c) that the defect is not serious enough to be of intervention level and therefore lack of repair does not constitute a failure to reasonably maintain the highway.
The way I’d go about this is to write a letter to them something along the lines of.

I am writing to you in relation to a claim for damage incurred to my vehicle.
On [date/time] I was driving my vehicle carefully and slowly on the roundabout at [road names] when I had the misfortune of receiving [description of damage to vehicle] caused by substantial potholes in the carriageway. This damage rendered by vehicle undriveable, and necessitated me to arrange for it to be recovered.
I have [attached photos/evidence] of the potholes that caused the damage, they were over [depth, in millimetres, probably just needs to be over 40 or 50mm] deep.

My vehicle that was damaged was a [make model] registration number [XXX], which is only [Y] years old and was in good roadworth conditions before the incident. I am a vehicle service/repair technician by occupation and in order to minimise costs I repaired the vehicle myself. This limited costs to £50 of parts and 1 hour of my time which I conservatively value at £20/hr, the costs totalling £70. [should include receipts for parts etc, photos of damage etc]
I am therefore seeking to claim this £70 cost of repair from you as the authority responsible for maintaining this area of highway and I would appreciate it if you could reply to me at [contact details] on this matter. I hope you consider this claim as reasonable as I have sought to rectify the damage to my vehicle at minimal cost, and I am only claiming a minimum of the direct costs incurred. I am reluctant to engage legal services to pursue this claim which may increase the costs.

Personally, if it is a significant pot-hole >40mm depth I think they'd be bonkers not to pay up-front to a request like this. Whilst the no-win-no-fee solicitors are less eager to take on the smaller 'damage only' claims the authorities do still regularly lose such claims fairly regularly due to pot-holes, overheight speed humps - etc and each loss tends to be at least £1500 including legal fees (or at least this used to be the case, I'm not sure if something changed in the last few years).

There's a section of roundabout outside of Carlisle that is so potholed/broken up it would cause my old BMW to stott and slide across the lanes. No avoiding it. Once I knew it was there I could slow to less than 10mph and crawl through but the first time was a shock.

Yes. It’ll be buried in the T&Cs of your insurance somewhere. They expect you to tell them about any accidents. By having an accident and especially making a claim, albeit against a third party, you will be pushing up your risk category. Probably nothing will come of it but it is a risk.

Cor - I tell you what, I'd have been unhappy about that! 🙁

Cor – I tell you what, I’d have been unhappy about that!

They ask you at every renewal if you've been involved in any accidents or claims, I'm not sure it's "buried".

I hit a fully open drain cover (40cm*20cm) while cycling home last year in the pouring rain at night. Saw it at the last moment and managed to hop the front wheel over it, but the rear smashed into it shattering the wheel, and pitching me off on to the pavement. Shredded my bibs, jersey, gloves, broke my helmet sheared a Ti bolt holding my rack to the bike and damaed both shifters. cuts, bruises, etc for me.

I unsuccessfully claimed against South Glos Council, providing all the details and values. They showed that the road had been inspected only a day previously and thus were not negligent/responsible as it was an accident. Almost £1000 with of damage to suckup.

They ask you at every renewal if you’ve been involved in any accidents or claims, I’m not sure it’s “buried”.

Perspective, innit - I wouldn't have seen that as an insurance claim (although I can't argue that it wasn't).

wouldn’t have seen that as an insurance claim (although I can’t argue that it wasn’t).

That's sort of the point I was making. By claiming from the council you are turning it into an accident with an insurance claim. Something you need to tell your insurers about. For £20 costs I wouldn't be doing that personally.

It’s not the councils fault though.

You sure about that? You seem to be so well informed about this incident, you must have been a witness. Pass your details to the OP as it'll help his claim...

People are responsible for the upkeep of the roads. If they don't comply with those responsibilities, damage and injury occurs. The only way those responsible recognise they've failed in their responsibility is by being penalised.

@r8jimbob88 If it was your loved one damaged as a result of negligence (assuming it was negligent), I'm sure you'd be a bit less casual about it.

That’s sort of the point I was making. By claiming from the council you are turning it into an accident with an insurance claim. Something you need to tell your insurers about. For £20 costs I wouldn’t be doing that personally.

I see it as more of an incident rather than an accident, and I don't think it is clear that this kind of incident/accident where there was not a 'collision' as such and nobody was injured must be reported to the insurer. Claiming from the council is not necessarily making this an insurance claim, even if the council involves their insurer this would be public liability insurance and not motor vehicle insurance.

As an example - if somebody projectile vomits over the car interior, and you're asking them for £70 to cover the costs of valeting the car then should that accident be reported to insurance?

I see it as more of an incident rather than an accident, and I don’t think it is clear that this kind of incident/accident where there was not a ‘collision’ as such and nobody was injured must be reported to the insurer. Claiming from the council is not necessarily making this an insurance claim, even if the council involves their insurer this would be public liability insurance and not motor vehicle insurance.

Absolutely, there is a line between reportable accidents/incidents and stuff that can be ignored. IMO this is a good example. Hit a pot hole, a cheap part is damaged and you fix it yourself and move on - definitely can be ignored. I'd say the same incident but you blame a third party and make a claim from them pushes it well over the line. You've escalated it and made a claim. That is exactly the sort of thing that can and should effect your insurance risk category and premiums. The only way to know for sure is to tell your insurer what happened and hope they say its fine.

It's pretty hard to claim. My BIL managed to get two tyres out of Stockport Council, but for £20 I'd let it go.

I've ripped and dented enough rims on my commuter bike to just suck it up for small amounts - it will be more of a headache trying to get that cost back.

My mate is currently pursuing a claim with Cheshire CC as a pot hole threw him off his bike breaking his pelivs. It's a complete ball ache and takes a long time.

I'd let it roll for £20 plus time !

I’d say the same incident but you blame a third party and make a claim from them pushes it well over the line. You’ve escalated it and made a claim. That is exactly the sort of thing that can and should effect your insurance risk category and premiums.

Yeah but I don't see it that way because this is not a claim against 3rd party motor insurance, the claim relates to provisions of section 41 of the 1980 Highways Act, it is the same provisions used for a personal slip/trip/fall injury claim caused by an uneven footway.

Insurers tell us drivers should notify them of pothole damage immediately, regardless of whether they intend to claim. You'll then usually have around five or six months before you have to file an insurance claim, which gives you time to see if a claim to the responsible authority will work first.

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/pothole-claims/

You’ll have to choose one or the other – you can’t claim from your insurer and the local authority responsible for maintaining the road. But remember, your insurer may be able to recover the money from the council on your behalf.
Whichever way you decide to claim, remember to inform your insurer of any damage.

https://www.aviva.co.uk/aviva-edit/your-things-articles/the-pothole-problem/

For £100 orless I'd rather pay myself than have the hassle of claiming and a claim on my insurance record.

the claim relates to provisions of section 41 of the 1980 Highways Act, it is the same provisions used for a personal slip/trip/fall injury claim caused by an uneven footway

A claim on the insurable interest no less so it doesn't really matter how you see it. The insurance insures the insurable interest. The pothole.interface is a material change in circumstance of the insured should a an incident occur that a claim is issued relating to the insured interest.

Just to echo a few comments higher up, you were either not looking where you were going and/or going too fast and you expect the local council tax payers to cough up?
Don't be a ****, just get it fixed yourself and drive a bit more carefully.

Definitely read the fine print provided by the council - some insist that you provide your insurance details and will contact them to log it as a claim (looking at you, Devon County Council).

The only reason I can think of them doing this is to discourage people from claiming against them due to the premium loading of having to declare an accident.

A claim on the insurable interest no less so it doesn’t really matter how you see it. The insurance insures the insurable interest. The pothole.interface is a material change in circumstance of the insured should a an incident occur that a claim is issued relating to the insured interest.

Huh! Insurable interest is something that needs to exist for an insurance policy and/or claim to be valid. It isn't so much that the insurance insures the insurable interest, but rather that the insurance doesn't insure if there isn't an insurable interest. But we're not talking about a claim on the insurable interest, we're not even talking about a claim on the insurance at all, we're talking about a claim against the council - so what has insurable interest got to do with the price of fish?

I'd write the council a nice letter/email. If they don't give that due consideration then I'd consider filing in the small claims court, if the case appears to be strong, or more importantly - if my solicitor with interest wanted to take that on.

Fixmystreet/or asking for records is also a good shout for evidence if the pothole was there for a while or previously communicated to the council.

Yes the claim to the council is about damage to what ? Thin air ?

Ever read the t+c with your insurance policy about what your obligated to tell them as conditions of accepting the policy?