Samir's first bit of knee-down action..

[graham22]

Don't think you're going to get much luck in blaming someone else.

A defence solicitor or police if they attended will ask:

You lost in in the dry due to a manhole cover? There's plenty of room outside of the covers? What sort of line were you on to have hit the cover - surely you should have been out more to see around the corner, particularly as there's a junction on the left too?

I'd be inclined to put it down to experience and be grateful there were no cars coming the other way & that the police did not attend.

[samZxR]

Don't think you're going to get much luck in blaming someone else.

A defence solicitor or police if they attended will ask:

You lost in in the dry due to a manhole cover? There's plenty of room outside of the covers? What sort of line were you on to have hit the cover - surely you should have been out more to see around the corner, particularly as there's a junction on the left too?

I'd be inclined to put it down to experience and be grateful there were no cars coming the other way & that the police did not attend.

i was in the middle of my lane, it was a long tight turn, u wont see the drains until the last second where u can do nothing but go through them. plus there was 2 drain covers, one is in the middle and the other one just next to the middle lining.

[samZxR]

of course im ganna blame them cos its not my fault goin on a drain that SHOULD be level with the surface that im riding on, not an inch above it! and im not the only one who had a crash because of that, somebody else got killed cos of them.. i was lucky for not having a car coming from the other side, or me gettin warped at that tree! maybe somebody else wont be that lucky..

[graham22]

Not sure if picture link is working, but I would have had my wheels outside of the outer manhole cover here.

So you're saying someone else actually got killed on the same band, in the dry due to the manhole covers?

Just put it down to experience mate, we've all been there before.

[samZxR]

Not sure if picture link is working, but I would have had my wheels outside of the outer manhole cover here.

So you're saying someone else actually got killed on the same band, in the dry due to the manhole covers?

Just put it down to experience mate, we've all been there before.

Not sure if picture link is working, but I would have had my wheels outside of the outer manhole cover here.

So you're saying someone else actually got killed on the same band, in the dry due to the manhole covers?

Just put it down to experience mate, we've all been there before.

a biker stopped to help us to get the bike out said that somebody on a ktm got killed last year on this road for the same reason. i knw that the experience was part of it, but still dangerous mate, so u wouldnt do anything about it and let the new riders die there because its their fault for not having enough experience and coming on this road eh?!

[Milky]

fair point. should be safe for riders of all levels not just tough luck because you're not experienced enough :/ We also sat for hours waiting for the AA to turn up and watched a good 10 or so other bikes pass by and nearly every one hit one of the two drains and was shaken/jumped off course by em

[samZxR]

My brother done some work with the forensic science and he saw the problem straight away and guessed what happened... The police would not argue against the biker... as they cant prove the speed he was going and as i was going on the right lane then thier job is done... they have nothing 2 do with the road surfce... thats a council thing... they r responsible for the manhole being out leveled... and they should have fixed it up wen the first death and reports happened. u cant just put it as experiance and forget about it... what about the next person and the next n next.... what they gonna do? put it as experiance? it dnt work like that... if sumthing happened... u need 2 do sumthing about it! he was very pissed off at me first cas he thought i was being stupid or too fast but as soon as he saw the pics... he knew exacly wat happened.

[TLS-Moose]

Google can be of help ..... http://www.bikechatforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=1462958

"It is not about proving neglect per se, you have to show that on the balance of probability that firstly the local authority knew about it, and that secondly they failed to correct the fault once they had been notified.

Now this can happen in one of two ways, either by having it reported by the Police either directly on the phone or in writing advising them of the defect which could be by way of the pink sheet after an injury accident has occured.

or

By showing that their regular inspection intervals were inadequate, and then showing that the local Highways were responsible rather than one of the utilities.

In some areas the utilities are responsible for their own manhole covers, in others the local authority maintain them on behalf of the utilities

If both Highways and the Utility companies can show that their inspection periods are reasonable and that any course of action deemed appropriate, such as repairs are carried out within a reasonable time, then no claim would succeed.

If the Police reported it, depending on the severity of the defect, there would still be a period of grace for the repair to be completed , but then it would have to be shown that the defect was a direct cause of the crash rather than lack of forward planning by the rider, for example if the manhole was places towards the nearside kerb, it would be argued that the rider should have been towards the dominant position because of the know debris and opotential dangers in towards the nearside.

Making a claim against the local authority can be one of the most difficult to get through, and I repeat the word "CAN".

Some do succeed, but thye are in the minority rather than the majority.


As motorcyclists we are constantly having to look out for poorly maintained road surfaces, loose gravel, diesel spillage, pot holes in fact a whole manner of potential problems that can affect the balance, grip and stability of the bike, and therefore our own safety.

Where the roads have been poorly maintained, or there is poor signage, or inadequate advanced warning of visibility or debris, there are many that will advise you to sue the local authority. In some cases this course of action may well be justified, however, before everyone jumps on the bandwagon, remember that any potential legal action against the local authority will be drawn out with no guarantee of success.

Section 41 of the Highways Act 1980 imposes a duty on the local authority to maintain a road. Section 58 of the Highways Act 1980 goes on to say that there will be a statutory defence if the Highways Authority has taken “such care as is in all the circumstances reasonably required”.

The issue of liability against the Highways Authority has recently been highlighted in the case of Gorringe v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (2002).

In Gorringe, the Claimant was involved in a head-on collision with a bus on the crest of a hill in West Yorkshire. On the approach to the crest there was a point at which the road dipped gently and turned to the right before rising uphill to the crest. Before the dip the course of the road was clearly visible. However, once in the dip a driver could not see the road beyond the crest until virtually at the crest, and in particular drivers would not be able to see the sharp left hand bend at the crest and a sudden change in gradient and the adverse camber.

Although a sign informing drivers of an uneven road surface stood between the dip and the crest, there had also once been a “SLOW” road marking which was found to be no longer visible as a result of wear and tear and/or resurfacing.

At first it was held that the Council had breached its duty to maintain the highway and the fact that it had failed to repaint the road markings were sufficient to find in favour of the Claimant. However the Court of Appeal decided that a road marking was not part of the physical or structural condition of the roadway and therefore lay outside the Council’s duty of care. The appeal was allowed.

This case suggests that the odds may be somewhat stacked against us, as you would think that advance warning signs are an important part of our decision making process - but all is not lost. Section 39 of the Road traffic Act 1988 makes it a requirement for every local authority to carry out a programme of measures designed to promote road safety. They must carry out studies into accidents arising from the use of vehicles on any road other than trunk roads within their area and, in light of those studies, take such measures as appear appropriate to the authority to prevent such accidents. This will include the construction, improvement, maintenance or repair of roads for which they are the highway authority.

In the case of Lavis v Kent County Council (1992) a motorcyclist suffered severe injuries when he collided with a kerbstone on a sharp bend. The rider claimed negligence against the Council for failure to erect various signs warning motorists of the bend. The Council succeeded initially in having the case dismissed, but the rider appealed. The appeal was successful as the Court of Appeal concluded that the Road Traffic Regulations Act 1984 imposed a duty on the authority to take reasonable care in implementing the requirements of the Act. They had taken no appropriate steps at all.

However, in 1994 the Council faced a similar claim! It was alleged that the authority was responsible for the Claimant’s accident in that it failed to erect a road sign in addition to the double broken white lines already in existence thereby providing warning of an approaching T junction. In the absence of evidence from a competent road engineer, the Claimant (Mr Lavis) failed to establish that any additional warning was necessary. The claimant was found wholly responsible for his accident.

The local authority does have a duty of care to keep our roads in a serviceable and safe condition but it is not always a cut and dried issue. In the majority of cases liability will be strongly, and quite possibly successfully, contested.

If you feel that there is a case to answer and you want to start the ball rolling, make sure you are properly advised – and be prepared for a long drawn out fight. More importantly don’t be surprised if the end result is rather different to what you expected!"

[graham22]

.... watched a good 10 or so other bikes pass by and nearly every one hit one of the two drains and was shaken/jumped off course by em

But they didn't fall off - surely this says something in itself!

Rather than trying to blame someone else, look at your riding, how you could have avoided crashing and save yourself some pain/expense in future.

Unfortunately there's raised/sunken manholes all around this county, many roads down here have 4 covers on bends - these were for cables which were installed at the roadside - the manholes are on corners because the cables needed joining there because they couldn't bend!!

At the risk of sounding like my old man (who's 62 & is still rapid on a FZ1) adjust your line and speed accordingly.

[Funky]

Is this the lad that sometimes park at your mates who has the ZX6 near me?

[samZxR]

Is this the lad that sometimes park at your mates who has the ZX6 near me?

nah not me mate

[plod]

Thats a bummer on you and your bike there mate but I wouldn't hold your breath on a claim for this one, the reason being, this particular stretch of road was in a very poor state and as you can see the road has been recently surface dressed (this year) and before they do this they repair potholes and any other small works they deem necessary before they surface dress it, the council will have a record of this work and prove that they are doing everything that they can within reason to keep this road up to a certain required standard. In my own experience it wasn't the manholes that were a problem on that corner but a utilities trench that was dug right across the road that was filled in and left extremely proud, it didn't matter what line you were taking you were going over it and it was never a pleasent experience no matter what speed you were doing. Small claims when i used it back in the 90's used to be £10 cost to you for every £100 you were claiming from them, it could be more expensive now. Good luck in whatever you decide to do.

[Daresay]

Perhaps some road signs wouldn't of been amiss, warning of an uneven road surface.

I really don't think these authorities take into account of motorcycles when they plan the location of hole covers.

Why do they have to be in the road anyway, in most cases, especially in the countryside, they could be situated on the side of the road if not off the road. As for hole covers in the middle of the road half way around a corner.... may not be a hazard for a car, but for a bike, as your aware, is a different story.

If there were no signs warning of an uneven road surface, i think you might have a case. Good luck.

[deej]

im sure it was stated above manholes are put in bends on the road for the pipework below that has a 45degree bend in it to allow the pipework to follow the line of road. most bends have a manhole in and around them somewhere and we all need to be aware of them and looking for them so not to have a accident like this

[Daresay]

im sure it was stated above manholes are put in bends on the road for the pipework below that has a 45degree bend in it to allow the pipework to follow the line of road. most bends have a manhole in and around them somewhere and we all need to be aware of them and looking for them so not to have a accident like this

Yes, i'm aware of that..... but do they have to be in the middle of the road ? I mean couldn't the pipe bend be at the edge of the road or not on the road at all.