• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Council says 1980 Highway act does not apply to a section of pavement

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Council says 1980 Highway act does not apply to a section of pavement

    We are taking the council to court and are acting as "Litigation friends" for a boy who at the time of the accident was aged 15 who used the edge of a back garden wall belonging to a council tenanted property to playfully jump down from a 18 inch high embankment wall to the pavement below which resulted in the wall collapsing on to his legs that were both broken during the accident.

    The pavement in question that we feel is subject to the highway act and inspections runs from the pavement at the side of the public road that narrows to a footpath and swings around the side of the property and is made from concrete and extends some 40 meters along the boundary wall of the property and goes up steps before reaching the area of where the accident took place and the wall at the front of the property starts within two meters of the public road.

    We requested highway inspection reports from the defendant and have been told that none are available because the land is not adopted but the council (Defendant) appear to own all the land in the area and had the side pavement and steps built over forty years ago to serve the general public’s right of way.

    Without being an expert I would had assumed that the act of building a pavement on what might be common land in itself means that the land has been adopted by the council and they are responsible for inspections and repairs under section 167 of the highway act.

    The wall itself at parts reaches about ten feet high and has been subject to over ten bob the builder repairs by the council over the years and sections of the wall falling down have been reported as vandalism so that a claim could be made for insurance by the council who now seemed to have put pressure on the elderly tenant of the property to shut up who previously had stated to ourselves “I don’t know why they don’t just knock the wall down and rebuild it”

    Councils fight dirty we have found and will lead you up the garden path using litigation teams to delay any actions for years if you let them so hit them at an early stage with court papers because that’s the only way to stop them monkeying around.
    Tags: None

  • #2
    If the wall was unsafe (i it appears that way if it collapsed), and is owned by the council and was accessible by children to whom it would be regarded as an invitation to play on, why are you concerned about whether or not the pavement was adopted?
    The council, like any other owner, has a responsibility to maintain its property in a safe condition.
    The section of the act quoted only relates to the powers of the authority, not their liability

    Comment


    • #3
      council responsible for the wall element, past cases proven it seems in court i.e. Taunton Deane council case in the early 80s

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by des8 View Post
        If the wall was unsafe (i it appears that way if it collapsed), and is owned by the council and was accessible by children to whom it would be regarded as an invitation to play on, why are you concerned about whether or not the pavement was adopted?
        The council, like any other owner, has a responsibility to maintain its property in a safe condition.
        The section of the act quoted only relates to the powers of the authority, not their liability
        The council owns both the property and the footpath at the side of the property and during highway inspections of the footpath they should had noticed big cracks in the wall and reported them to the land owner who in this case are themselves and we even have a sniff of this happening in the past since an internal memo was sent but when we asked in what capacity was Mr XXX reporting problems with the wall the defendant seemed to clamed up.

        The defense team wants to argue that no inspection reports exist for the footpath and seem to think that you can build a brick structure used by the public and just ignore the condition of the wall and pathway and are trying to hide behind the land not being adopted or something

        Comment


        • #5
          I don't see how the lack of inspection reports helps the council's position.
          On the contrary I would be arguing as they have not inspected the wall they have been negligent and thus liable for damages.

          You have evidence of the previous poor state of the wall and previous collapses (?) and could possibly obtain a structural engineers report about its current condition if you feel it is still unsafe and shows signs of earlier bodged repairs.

          Comment


          • #6
            Seems like you might be approaching this from the wrong angle and simply need to approach it as a negligent property owner failing to maintain their property resulting in personal injury.

            The highways inspector wouldn't be liable to report disrepair of a wall next to the highway as that's not his/her job. They might as a concerned every day person if it looks potentially unsafe, but there's no other obligation on them really.
            COMPLETING AN N180 DIRECTIONS QUESTIONNAIRE (SMALL CLAIMS TRACK) GUIDE

            My posts here are based on my experience of a variety of life events. I have no formal legal training & if in doubt take professional legal advice or contact CAB. If you follow anything I write here you do so at your own risk & I accept no liability for any loss, costs or other outcomes.

            Private messages are disabled as help is only offered publicly. I do not come on here in the evening, at weekends or on public holidays.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by des8 View Post
              I don't see how the lack of inspection reports helps the council's position.
              On the contrary I would be arguing as they have not inspected the wall they have been negligent and thus liable for damages.

              You have evidence of the previous poor state of the wall and previous collapses (?) and could possibly obtain a structural engineers report about its current condition if you feel it is still unsafe and shows signs of earlier bodged repairs.
              I think that under the highway act during inspections that if they notice that your garden wall is in danger of falling over then they can issue you with a order to fix it and that this was an obligation placed on the person inspecting the area.

              Yes we think a structural report is in order and we have already had a sample of the mortar analysed by a laboratory before we commence proceeding so is not a joint expert witness that they object to us using and the report states that the mortar mix is not within building regulations and this comes on top of numerous bob the builder repairs to the wall but if they still want to contest the safety of the wall then we might as well go the full hog.

              Basically they are saying that day is night but because we served the court papers on the council so the solicitor acts as if the council instructed them but in fact are working for the insurance company so they are going to be surprised at the little insurance fraud that I have uncovered along the way but I don't know how to go about presenting this in court or if I need a private meeting with the judge.

              The tenant of the property who appeared to be a lovely old man also seems to have been pressured to shut up and went from offering a cup of tea when first asked about ownership of the property to apparently now saying that he was scared to death, had been threatened when in fact he was a potential witness to the case who said at the time "I don't know why they don;t just knock the wall down and rebuild it" if you follow the logic.

              Take on local government is like taking on the Mafia and they hold all the cards but someone's got to do it.


              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by des8 View Post
                I don't see how the lack of inspection reports helps the council's position.
                On the contrary I would be arguing..............
                Thanks for the link at the bottom, well worth a look and the part we had trouble with was the directions on the back page of the form which the defendants solicitor did not ask us to corporate in completing this part of the form as they should have done so we did our own draft directions and I think we did a good job myself.

                Comment


                • #9
                  You need to be careful using the highways act in your case if the highway authority and local council are the same as sec 58 gives them a defence.
                  You should consider basing your case as per jaguarsuk

                  Comment

                  View our Terms and Conditions

                  LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

                  If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


                  If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.

                  Announcement

                  Collapse
                  1 of 2 < >

                  SHORTCUTS


                  First Steps
                  Check dates
                  Income/Expenditure
                  Acknowledge Claim
                  CCA Request
                  CPR 31.14 Request
                  Subject Access Request Letter
                  Example Defence
                  Set Aside Application
                  Directions Questionnaire



                  If you received a court claim and would like some help and support dealing with it, please read the first steps and make a new thread in the forum with as much information as you can.





                  NOTE: If you receive a court claim note these dates in your calendar ...
                  Acknowledge Claim - within 14 days from Service

                  Defend Claim - within 28 days from Service (IF you acknowledged in time)

                  If you fail to Acknowledge the claim you may have a default judgment awarded against you, likewise, if you fail to enter your defence within 28 days from Service.




                  We now feature a number of specialist consumer credit debt solicitors on our sister site, JustBeagle.com
                  If your case is over £10,000 or particularly complex it may be worth a chat with a solicitor, often they will be able to help on a fixed fee or CFA (no win, no fee) basis.
                  2 of 2 < >

                  Support LegalBeagles


                  Donate with PayPal button

                  LegalBeagles is a free forum, founded in May 2007, providing legal guidance and support to consumers and SME's across a range of legal areas.

                  See more
                  See less

                  Court Claim ?

                  Guides and Letters
                  Loading...



                  Search and Compare fixed fee legal services and find a solicitor near you.

                  Find a Law Firm


                  Working...
                  X