Or is the council being unreasonable?(11 Posts)
Would genuinely like to know what people think. The pavement outside our house has always been a bit damaged, the tarmac is cracking and sinking so when we drive the car onto the driveway we go down a big dip and hit the bottom of the car every time.
Recently we did some work in the front garden and in doing that we damaged some more of the pavement by pulling up a bush who's roots had grown under it.
So thought it was a good time to phone the council and ask if they could repair the pavement. A man came and looked at it and said they will repair the bit we damaged but not the bit where we drive the car on as that doesn't affect pedestrians.
We then got a letter in the post to say they'll be coming to do it soon and we will have to pay approximately £110.08 (very specific for an estimate!) for them to repair the bit we damaged (we did expect that we'd have to pay for that bit).
But they won't repair the other bit even though they will have come out and have the tarmac all there ready! And we're not allowed to get any other quotes to see if we can get it done more cheaply (its only an area of about 30cm square) and we have to pay, we can't decide not to have it done. Not sure what happens if we don't have £100 to spare! We're not allowed to repair the other bit ourselves either.
My initial reaction is the kick up a fuss, it seems so ridiculous and jobsworth to repair one bit but not the bit next to it (which is the part we really want done as it is probably damaging our car driving over it) but wanted to check if you think I'm overreacting?
Is the damaged bit on your property? Not sure of the legal side of you driving over the pavement to get to your drive - are they responsible for you being able to drive over the pavement without wrecking your car??Is it caused in the first place by your car?
Not overreacting at all. Take it higher up - threaten to go to the local rag if necessary, the council I work for hates it when people do that . Some idiot is being jobsworth and it shouldn't be hard to arrange either 1- you pay them do fix both bits or 2- you pay someone cheaper to fix the bit you damaged. Can't imgaine why they would be so petty as to refuse to fix a bit of broken road anyway!
No the damage wasn't caused by us driving over it as it was like it when we moved in, but I suppose its happened from previous people driving their car over it over the years.
Did consider contacting local paper or trying to take it higher up but didn't want to feel stupid if I'm overreacting and they're within their rights to charge what they like if we damaged it.
£110 for any sort of building work is very cheap.
Everyone has to drive over public pavements to get from the road to your driveway, and they always lower the pavement at the edge of the road to allow you to do that rather than having to drive up the kerb, so you would think they would mend the pavement in between if its hampering you getting onto the driveway!
DP thinking og offering the tarmac people a bit of extra cash to get them to do the whole lot, but as they can't give us a date we don't know if we'll be in.
Well, I can understand that you can't have the work done privately, as it is a public highway and if anyone should hurt them selves by tripping over it if it was not done properly, the council would actually be responsible. As for the driveway, if you don't have a dropped kerb, I believe you are not supposed to drive across the pavement. In this area we have to pay to have the kerb dropped ( it cost us over £400 for a 10 foot wide drop). If the dip in the pavement is not affecting pedestrians, I don't supose the council will arrange for the repair because your inconvenience is not their resonsibility. I also suspect the council employees will be unable to accept any sort of payment to do the extra work, again because ultimately, the pavement is the council's responsibility.
I agree it all sounds a very jobsworth, but sadly, I don't think you are going to get very far with it.
Have you spoken to the relevant highways authority? I think that there is a statutory obligation for the local highways authority to ensure that highway land is in reasonable state of repair. Highways land is defined as 'land maintainable at public expense'. As the land in question is a pavement, it is completely reasonable to assume that a pedestrian should be able to use it without the risk of hurting themselves. Plus, if you have pointed out that there is an issue with the pavement and that it needs to be repaired, I would think you'd have a case to seek to have any repair costs incurred as a result of the pavement covered by the HA.
I'd write to them and state this, plus that as you already pay your taxes (part of which go to the Highways authority in your area for maintenance of Highway land) you don't feel you should have to pay twice.
Join the discussion
Please login first.