Potholes and the Poor Condition of Road Surfaces

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Karen Alexander on June 2, 2013 at 13:01

The roads and pavements in Harringay are indeed in a pretty poor state.  There is a blitz at the moment by the council to fill all the potholes but this is just a patch up job - in many cases the roads need a complete resurface.  In fact there is a small pot of money for this purpose and the council will make a decision on which roads are in the poorest state over the next few weeks.  In the meantime Cllr Schmitz and I have looked at every single road and pavement in Harringay ward and have been taking to residents on the doorstep with our colleague Asha Kaur to try and establish which are most in need in Harringay.  We will be continuing to work on this over the coming weeks and I will come back to the site and keep you updated in due course.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Esat Karahasan on June 3, 2013 at 2:35

This does in fact seem to be the case as some of the potholes I am complaining about on quieter roads that I have had the opportunity to stop and photograph and some of the larger ones on busier roads do seem to have been repaired which in-turn rubbishes any claim I could have made as there is now no evidence of the pothole just a repaired patch. Whilst I do appreciate this it doesn't get my car repaired nor does it help with the cost! I wonder if you or Cllr Schmitz may be able to assist me on that matter at all?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on June 3, 2013 at 9:18

it doesn't get my car repaired nor does it help with the cost! I wonder if you or Cllr Schmitz may be able to assist me on that matter at all?

Councils have sometimes been found liable for injuries to pedestrians who have fallen on the pavements that are gradually breaking up in Haringey.

I make no defence of the poor state of the roads, quite the reverse, but the idea that councils or councillor should be responsible for car repairs sounds far-fetched.

If you are at all serious about seeking evidence (that in the case of some potholes, may temporarily have disappeared) for compensation, then you might also have to be prepared to provide other evidence too:

• of the state of repair of your car prior to the breakage;
• of your driving style (i.e. do you make any attempt at mitigation - do you try to avoid potholes and not charge at them at full speed? ;
• of the causal link between the potholes and the damage to your well-maintained car, being carefully driven at legal speeds; 
• of ownership. White-van-man drivers not driving vehicles they pay to maintain themselves, don't always treat the vehicle with respect.

I accept that it is not always possible to avoid potholes.

You unlikely to succeed of course, unless you are making just a rhetorical point about the real costs of poor road maintenance. I'd rather see the council spend taxes on fixing the roads rather than compensation.

I am not trying to defend the condition of the roads, which have deteriorated. Unfortunately, the council prioritises spending on "Communication" (PR) some of whose bloated budget will be used to tell you how much the roads are improving. The council has long favoured image over getting the basics right.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Esat Karahasan on June 4, 2013 at 1:05

Clive, I understand you are trying to remain neutral to the situation and in particular my case though I wanted to makes things clear so as to not appear as someone who is making a mountain out of a mole hill.

You commented that the idea that councils or councillor should be responsible for car repairs sounds far-fetched, I beg to differ. I pay business rates, council tax and for parking permits all to Haringey Council in addition to the Road Tax I pay to the government, all of which are stated to use a portion  of the income generated for the maintenance of the road surfaces. This said maintenance is quite obviously not happening at all in some cases in others far too slowly.

I am actually a person who takes great care of my car and have it regularly serviced at and Maintained all of which I have evidence of in receipts etc.

Driving style actually is neither here nor there and would be impossible to prove either way and any attempt to clasify it without evidence would be an opinion not fact - such issues should be based on facts for which evidential proof is available as your own statements implies.

The link between potholes and the damage caused to my vehicle in particular would become clear once the repair, service and maintenance history of the vehicle where taken into consideration and the time it has taken for these damaged/worn parts have deteriorated and become damaged/worn. 

Ownership I would have thought was a given and in any case your summary "White-van-man drivers not driving vehicles they pay to maintain themselves, don't always treat the vehicle with respect" is contradictory in itself. Lets image I fitted the characteristics or stereotype of a "white-van-man" or any other stereotype and did not pay the maintenance myself and therefore "didn't always treat the vehicle with respect" I would a) have no grounds for the claim and b) would not care about the vehicle!

I'm glad to see you accept that it is not always possible to avoid and in many cases very unsafe to even contemplate it. 

I am very well aware it would be very unlikely to succeed, and I too would rather see the funds go toward repairing and maintaining the roads, but should I really bare the burden if I have done my bit and more? Whilst the council prioritises spending on other less important things like PR telling me how much the roads have improved, if they where maintained to a good standard there would be no need to improve or communicate the said improvements - cause before cost, common sense really.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on June 4, 2013 at 8:51

Well, I wish you good luck with your approach. The council is supposed to spend all the Parking Account profit surplus on transport improvements.

CPZ proceeds are "ring fenced", mandated to be spent in this way. This grand statement (and most "ring fencing") is meaningless, as the profits can simply displace money the council would have spent in that ongoing budget anyway. In other words, last financial year's £6,000,000 profit is unlikely to be added to the previous transport budget.

Since CPZ profits effectively go into a general pool (the consolidated fund), a small element of Parking Charge Notices is likely to go towards paying for the council's brand new £90,000 PR position ... to gloss the road surface!

If it was a council photographer who took photos of the Council Leader holding a spade above a road repair, he or she would have been paid as part of the Communications Budget.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Robin2 on June 3, 2013 at 9:11

Unfortunately the councils are hampered by the fact that all the signs are that the Government is going to spend money on building new roads, of questionnable value when apparently stats show a reduction in road use in recent years. It would be a major boost to the economy, jobs etc etc if they simply introduced a major new road re-surfacing programme. But that would make far too much sense and isn't as exciting as nice new roads is it?

• ▶ Reply