We don’t want to pick up the bill, say drivers

POTHOLE MISERY: Derek Jones wants compensation after his car was badly damaged. POTHOLE MISERY: Derek Jones wants compensation after his car was badly damaged.

DRIVERS in Worcestershire say they don’t want to fork out for fellow motorists who wreck their cars on potholes.

Readers contacted the Worcester News after we featured the story of Derek Jones who is battling Worcestershire County Council over a £165 bill for damage to his car caused by a pothole.

The 54-year-old, of Norton, near Worcester, wrecked his car’s suspension and burst a tyre after going over a massive pothole in nearby Church Lane.

But the council has refused to compensate him despite knowing about the pothole the day before the incident.

Now readers have largely backed the council’s position claiming payouts would add to financial problems and put a burden on taxpayers.

Carl Beavers, 39, of Mersey Road, Ronkswood, Worcester, said: “I damaged my car last year on a pothole in Spetchley Road and it left me with a £190 bill.

“I was hopping mad about it, but if we all went asking the council for money, it would cripple them.

“I sympathise with the chap, but I don’t see why taxpayers should pay for other taxpayers unlucky enough to go over one.”

Mum-of-two Maggie Noble, of Droitwich, said: “When I read the story my first thought was, ‘you’ve been done a bad turn, but why should we pay for it’? I suspect that loads of people have damaged cars this way.”

Another reader, who asked to remain anonymous, said: “Perhaps you would like to ask the Norton pothole driver whether he would have seen a pedestrian as this is a rather dark road at the best of times and he should have been driving accordingly – as a rate payer I do not wish to pay for his repairs.”

Mr Jones, who has been considering taking his bill to the small claims court, has insisted that he was right to ask for the money.

“When I paid my road tax I was led to believe it’s meant to compensate for things like this,” he said.

“I am absolutely not trying it on. The tyre was reasonably new and had a good 12,000-15,000 miles left on it. This is a genuine case.”

County Hall has refused to say why it rejected his claim, but revealed that teams are out filling around 200 potholes a day following the harsh winter.

Comments(13)

CMarsh says...
3:50pm Fri 8 Mar 13

Fair enough he shouldn't be suing the council but can anyone inform me what we actually pay our road tax for? I had a similar incident happen but luckily mine was just the cost of a new tyre.

lowlybarnacle says...
4:47pm Fri 8 Mar 13

Surprised at the response, it's not like people's council tax bills are going to go up due to this chap's claim and if the council know that people aren't going to seek damages, they won't make road repairs a priority.

The best way forward is for people to report potholes whenever they see them. This will result in defects being repaired which is what the council wants and is what people want.

If you have a smartphone, there is no excuse for not doing your bit. There are free apps available that will use GPS to automatically send the pothole location to the local authority.

I report issues via an iPhone and have to say the council are really quick to repair defects. It takes about the same time to report a pothole that it does to update your facebook status.

b1ackb1rd says...
5:42pm Fri 8 Mar 13

And if the pot hole caused a collision which lead to a death instead of damage to some bloke's car do we presume the motoring public will show a similar disinterest?

i-cycle says...
6:42pm Fri 8 Mar 13

Road Tax hasn't paid for roads for years. It all gets lost on central Government coffers and its the tax payer that actually picks up most of the bill.

This is a constant gripe we get as cyclists. We don't pay road tax so we shouldn't be on the roads.

The fact is that the vast majority of cyclists also have cars and we certainly pay our contribution for the highway network through the other taxes we pay.

Ironically if more did cycle in our urban areas there would be lots less cars on the road which means less damage and potholes and less congestion and more parking spaces for those who did want or have to drive.

Its really about time we got away from the us and them attitude between cyclist and motorists as there are benefits for all in reducing car use on our over congested highway network.

Saturn V says...
11:42pm Fri 8 Mar 13

"“When I paid my road tax I was led to believe it’s meant to compensate for things like this,” he said. "

I don't know who led him to believe that, but I've found insurance usually deals with things like this.

chrism says...
2:23am Sat 9 Mar 13

Loving the "road tax" (sic) comments from those who seem to think that they should get something back for the tax they pay. For their reference the road tax (sic) they pay goes towards the NHS, policing etc. That and if you add up all the costs to the country from motorists (not just the roads network, also policing, paramedics etc.) motorists already get a pretty good deal - and yes I am one myself.

On the more general point, I do sympathise with those who have to pay for damage caused to their vehicles, and if the council isn't fulfilling their statutory duties regarding repairing roads it is reasonable to claim compensation - in such cases the council should pay it. However I don't believe they have any obligation to repair every pothole within 24 hours of it being reported - that would simply be impossible for any council, hence why they're not legally obliged to do so. Yes they are required to keep the roads in a reasonable state of repair, but there is a limit to what it is reasonable for them to do.

I'd certainly recommend Mr Jones not to go to the small claims court - he'll just be wasting his own time and money, as well as that of the council, as they will win such a case. There is plenty of legal precedent of councils successfully defending such claims where they can show that they have a road inspection and repair system in place which fulfils their legal obligations. Personally I'd rather the council's money went on repairing potholes than wasted on pointless legal action.

Though I do have to congratulate WEN on another successful glum faced picture.

Karl Hunderson says...
8:31am Sat 9 Mar 13

Genuine question: are you more likely to get a damaged car from a pot hole if you have low profile tyres than if you are have normal tyres?

OrdinaryMan says...
10:56am Sat 9 Mar 13

Karl Hunderson wrote:
Genuine question: are you more likely to get a damaged car from a pot hole if you have low profile tyres than if you are have normal tyres?
Yes.

Jabbadad says...
11:56am Sat 9 Mar 13

Vehicle road tax is necessary everybody knows that, however as said on here the huge revenue goes into the Treasury coffers, and then some is allocated to the district councils for road maintenance.
Motorists have a right to complain if the large vehicle taxes they pay don't keep the roads up to scratch.
Of course the highways departments cannot be blamed for the effects of weather has to our roads.
Drivers of larger cars pay higher taxes on Road Fund Licenses and the extra petrol we use.
As to Pot holes Warwickshire were successfully using a Pot hole repair machine some years back, reportedly saving £millions per year. One would hope that when Worcestershire decide to invest in a very expensive machine that they would have gone to talk to one of our sister County Neighbors for advice? Whether they did we might never know but the Pot Hole machine they bought costing I believe over a £million kept breaking down and was eventually sold. So we are back to inefficient repairs by a couple of men a shovel and tramping the tarmac in to last just a few days / weeks. Yes they use machines for larger areas, but the smaller potholes get left for ages even though they are very dangerous. And to report them via the web is not easy I think they assume we are all surveyors.
And again I ask what happened to the two men on Motorcycles travelling around on road inspections?

Redhillman says...
3:49pm Sat 9 Mar 13

If the council want to stop settling insurance claims, then the simple solution is to repair roads properly. Of course, the weather cannot be controlled but it only becomes a problem if a road is poorly looked after or has not been repaired properly. If the council filled in potholes adequately, or better still, resurfaced roads instead of just merely using the sticky plaster approach, roads would deteriorate less, they'd be less need to carry out pothole repairs time and time again at a huge cost to the tax payer, while there would be less insurance claims to settle. And if there are less potholes, they'd be less people to employ to inspect and repaid the current thousands of potholes on Worcestershire's roads, saving further costs. It's not rocket science.

The Doosra says...
6:10pm Sat 9 Mar 13

Redhillman wrote:
If the council want to stop settling insurance claims, then the simple solution is to repair roads properly. Of course, the weather cannot be controlled but it only becomes a problem if a road is poorly looked after or has not been repaired properly. If the council filled in potholes adequately, or better still, resurfaced roads instead of just merely using the sticky plaster approach, roads would deteriorate less, they'd be less need to carry out pothole repairs time and time again at a huge cost to the tax payer, while there would be less insurance claims to settle. And if there are less potholes, they'd be less people to employ to inspect and repaid the current thousands of potholes on Worcestershire's roads, saving further costs. It's not rocket science.
And it's not rocket science to point out that private sector contractors undertake road repairs on the council's behalf.

Jabbadad says...
10:27pm Sat 9 Mar 13

But under the instruction criteria of their employers, who happen to be the County Council. That's how contracts work Doorsa.

Letterman says...
3:38pm Sun 10 Mar 13

The Doosra wrote:
Redhillman wrote:
If the council want to stop settling insurance claims, then the simple solution is to repair roads properly. Of course, the weather cannot be controlled but it only becomes a problem if a road is poorly looked after or has not been repaired properly. If the council filled in potholes adequately, or better still, resurfaced roads instead of just merely using the sticky plaster approach, roads would deteriorate less, they'd be less need to carry out pothole repairs time and time again at a huge cost to the tax payer, while there would be less insurance claims to settle. And if there are less potholes, they'd be less people to employ to inspect and repaid the current thousands of potholes on Worcestershire's roads, saving further costs. It's not rocket science.
And it's not rocket science to point out that private sector contractors undertake road repairs on the council's behalf.
The contractor merely carries out the type of repair as instructed by the council. The contractor may know simply filling in potholes is not adequate, but if the council tell them to do it, there's not much they can do. The council is ultimately responsible.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree