Four cyclists suing council - for injuries caused by crashing on same pothole

BTBS Have you ever shown "the fuckers" you mean business by following up sub section 4 and making an application to a magistrates court?  You should bear in mind that the council's code of practice will outline time frames in which repairs will be carried, usually having a 28 day category, adding in a couple of days for the inspection to be carried out and the council complied without your "countdown ticker".

I would suggest that anyone thinking of following BTBS should get hold of their local HAs code of practice, should be downloadable, and familiarise yourself with Well Maintained Highways 

http://www.ukroadsliaisongroup.org/en/utilities/document-summary.cfm?doc...

It's dull as ditch water but if you're going to take a HA to court it's best to know what they should have done first, it might also reduce the number of non actionable reports council's get through web sites (several council's have stopped responding to these due to time that's wasted looking for non actionable or non existant features with poorly described locations.)

The definition of a'way' out of repair can be defined by an ordinary person that would say it is in dis-repair, this is explicitily mentioned in the Act. Also is that if the responsible person/s do not fix the way (or bridge) within a calaendar month of notification (ALWAYS mention this section when filing a repair/complaint about pothole.) you can get a court order to force them to do so, again this is made clear in the 1980 Act and is specifically this section  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/66/section/56

"(2)If, within 1 month from the date of service on him of a notice under subsection (1) above, the respondent does not serve on the complainant a notice admitting both that the way or bridge in question is a highway and that the respondent is liable to maintain it, the complainant may apply to the Crown Court for an order requiring the respondent, if the court finds that the way or bridge is a highway which the respondent is liable to maintain and is out of repair, to put it in proper repair within such reasonable period as may be specified in the order.

(3)The complainant for an order under subsection (2) above shall give notice in writing of the application to the appropriate officer of the Crown Court and the notice shall specify—

(a)the situation of the way or bridge to which the application relates,

(b)the name of the respondent,

(c)the part of the way or bridge which is alleged to be out of repair, and

(d)the nature of the alleged disrepair;

and the complainant shall serve a copy of the notice on the respondent.

(4)If, within 1 month from the date of service on him of a notice under subsection (1) above, the respondent serves on the complainant a notice admitting both that the way or bridge in question is a highway and that the respondent is liable to maintain it, the complainant may, within 6 months from the date of service on him of that notice, apply to a magistrates’ court for an order requiring the respondent, if the court finds that the highway is out of repair, to put it in proper repair within such reasonable period as may be specified in the order."

further the responsible person/s has a statutory duty to maintain a highway maintainable at public expense in a safe and serviceable manner for all types of road users.

so a shitty repair that makes it dangerous for people on bikes can be challenged.

I put this in all my repair requests too, just to show the fuckers I mean business, they've got to day 31 on plenty of occasions and i do send them the odd nudge with a countdown ticker.lol

When these highway bods examine roads for defects they do not consider the danger to vulnerable road users, ala cyclists. They consider the danger towards car drivers because cars cost thousands of pounds more than bikes (although my titanium bike is now worth more than my aging car) and its all about risk versus compensation.

To get a pot hole fixed faster you Need to report it and add the comment something like, "likely to unsaddle a cyclist into the path of moving traffic or cause serious falling injury." Make sure they acknowledge your report. I guarantee this will in most cases speed up the repair. I know a person who works for highways. They have too many to fix and not enough time in the working week to cope so they have to triage and prioritise. An unreported dangerous pot hole allows some scope for ignorance being bliss.

Did any of these people or any other road users report this using the Cycling UK "Fill That Hole"?  https://www.fillthathole.org.uk/

This is an easy way to identify and report road defects and gives a method of proving that the defect has been reported.

Why is it that when an organisation grows larger than about ten people it adopts an obstructive, awkward, "them and us" mentality and its behaviour often flies in the face of reason?  God protect us from councils.

So contact the lawyer and offer your additional evidence... It may only be verbal, but it's another corroborative voice to his argument.

Paul Rowlands is a mate of mine and someone I ride with often.

The pothole in question would be best described as a chasim.

In addition to those injured there are at least another 4 riders who have suffered broken wheels and ruined tyres.

It's absolute bull that it was repaired. When I rode past in the New Year it was still doing an impression of the Grand Canyon.

Staffs County Council also have a duty to repair the highway... I'm not a lawyer, but I don't remember there being graduations in the urgency of the repair in the Highways Act (1980)