PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

I've reversed into pole set up in calming area (1 foot into road) - is this pole/sign legal?
stayanon
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 05:10
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 27 Apr 2016
Member No.: 84,013



Hi
I'm a little frustrated to say the least....I've just made a drop off in a street in Newcastle upon Tyne (1.00am) - I noticed when I entered the side road that it was 2 way traffic but had calming area at the entrance/exit for one vehicle only to pass.
It had 2 huge black and white "Sharp Deviation" or "Chevron" road signs on two black poles around 15 feet from the junction. I am pretty sure as this road is a normal road with no tight deviations that the wrong sign has been installed. I would assume when a chevron sign has been used it is informing motorists of dangers to tight bends (?)
I was unfortunately distracted and forgot the road tethered into a calming area with exit for one vehicle. I've gone to reverse - checked mirrors etc and haven't noticed the black pole (which is a foot into the road) as the street has extremely poor lighting (it was 1am and the road is nearly in darkness). I've caused major damage to the side of my car with damage done to the side bumper and rear quarter panel before it gets to the wheel arch.
I am annoyed with myself but I'm equally annoyed that I can't understand the mentality of why the council has placed a Sharp Deviation sign on 2 black poles with each pole causing an obstruction on the path (for wheelchairs) and the road. It's baffling and I've genuinely can't remember seeing another road with this type of signage.
I would like to assume the correct sign which should have been placed is the road would be the mounted yellow plastic signage (yellow and white plastic bollards with a blue arrows).
There is also no coloured road surface to inform drivers its a calming area.

I would like to know if I have a case to take legal action against the council for damage done to my vehicle. I've used Pepipoo a few times and members have been very helpful and honest in the past.
I've obviously made the error by not checking everywhere before moving but feel I have not been helped by the poor decisions of the Council.

I have attached the files but will try to also add the photos to this thread too.

Thank you in advance for any help
C



Just to add - that I parked the vehicle on the right hand side of the road. From that position, I then reversed.

This post has been edited by stayanon: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 05:11
Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image
Attached Image
Attached Image
Attached Image


Attached Image
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 05:10
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
stayanon
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 05:21
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 27 Apr 2016
Member No.: 84,013



Hopefully I'm reading this correctly....I've just searched to see if there is a minimum width which councils are required to abide to for clearance for wheelchairs (as the pole is also cemented into the path).

I've found this:
The British Government have set a recommended minimum width, to be enforced by local Authorities. What is the minimum width?

Answer: "1800mm on access routes to buildings, from bus stops or car parks with a deregation down to 1200mm around existing obstructions -'Manual for Streets 2' CIHT 2010".

I do not believe the clearance is 1200mm and will check this tomorrow. If the width is less than 1200mm is the signage illegal?

Thanks
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
peterguk
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 09:32
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,735
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



So you knew the signs were there... You forgot the signs were there... And reversed into one...

Why would the council be liable?


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Slithy Tove
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 10:00
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,283
Joined: 5 Jan 2012
Member No.: 52,178



Driving into a stationary object is never really going to be in your favour, whether that object should have been there or not.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 10:05
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



I sometimes feel sorry for councils, they just cannot win.
They have put in a chicane to narrow road and presumably calm traffic speeds
To stop people driving over the kerb and potentially wiping out tyres or suspension, they put up a ruddy great sign(s) to guide people into the clear carriageway.
Then when someone clouts the sign they moan about council ?????????

You hit a stationary object that is placed off the carriageway.
That is not the council's fault.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fredd
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 10:21
Post #6


Webmaster
Group Icon

Group: Root Admin
Posts: 8,205
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
From: Wokingham, UK
Member No.: 2



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 10:05) *
I sometimes feel sorry for councils, they just cannot win.
They have put in a chicane to narrow road and presumably calm traffic speeds
To stop people driving over the kerb and potentially wiping out tyres or suspension, they put up a ruddy great sign(s) to guide people into the clear carriageway.
Then when someone clouts the sign they moan about council ?????????

It's not a particularly good sign for visibility of the obstacle, though - a sign normally used for advance warning of a bend, way up in the air, on thin black poles! Presumably they've used that design to allow cyclists to pass underneath, rather than bright yellow bollards you'd normally expect at a width restriction.

Not that any of that really explains why it'd be someone else's fault if you reverse into an obstacle you're already aware of, however poorly designed.


--------------------
Regards,
Fredd

__________________________________________________________________________
Pepipoo relies on you
to keep this site running!
Donate to Pepipoo now using your
Visa, Mastercard, debit card or PayPal account
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BaggieBoy
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 10:22
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,723
Joined: 3 Apr 2006
From: North Hampshire
Member No.: 5,183



QUOTE (The Slithy Tove @ Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 10:00) *
Driving into a stationary object is never really going to be in your favour, whether that object should have been there or not.

There some exceptions to this, such as a skip in the road without lights, however in this case I think there is no chance the council will stump up. Time to invest in some reversing sensors.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
samthecat
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 10:27
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 349
Joined: 21 Apr 2016
Member No.: 83,881





Shouldn't they have added something like this?

(Couldn't resist)


--------------------
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mickR
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 10:47
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7,235
Joined: 5 Jan 2007
From: England
Member No.: 9,919



No! He might have hit the pole while being distracted reading the sign! dry.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 10:52
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (Fredd @ Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 10:21) *
.........It's not a particularly good sign for visibility of the obstacle, though - a sign normally used for advance warning of a bend, way up in the air, on thin black poles! Presumably they've used that design to allow cyclists to pass underneath, rather than bright yellow bollards you'd normally expect at a width restriction.

Not that any of that really explains why it'd be someone else's fault if you reverse into an obstacle you're already aware of, however poorly designed.


Signs are IMO pee poor and totally wrong.
But cannot miss them really. (and didn't)
But still didn't chase the car down and gie it a good kicking.
May as well moan about hitting a lamp post
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nigelbb
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 11:29
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,768
Joined: 17 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,602



QUOTE (stayanon @ Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 05:10) *
I would like to know if I have a case to take legal action against the council for damage done to my vehicle.

Personally I would keep quiet about it as the Council have probably got a stronger case for compensation for the damage you have done to their poles.


--------------------
British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice(Appendix C contains Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 ) & can be found here http://www.britishparking.co.uk/Code-of-Pr...ance-monitoring
DfT Guidance on Section 56 and Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...ing-charges.pdf
Damning OFT advice on levels of parking charges that was ignored by the BPA Ltd Reference Request Number: IAT/FOIA/135010 – 12 October 2012
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
spanner345
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 11:52
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,749
Joined: 11 Oct 2007
From: hull
Member No.: 14,394



Legally, does this collision need reporting to the police?


--------------------
ARSE DRINK FECK........



DRINK MORE
TOILET DUCK
50 mls vodka
50 mls Red Bull
330 mls Blue Wkd
25 mls tequila
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 12:52
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (spanner345 @ Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 11:52) *
Legally, does this collision need reporting to the police?

If damage has been caused to the pole, yes.


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
glasgow_bhoy
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 13:00
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 10,460
Joined: 8 Sep 2008
Member No.: 22,424



I don't think anyone would expect someone to reverse where those poles are tbh- it looks like there are better places to turn around in that street.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stayanon
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 15:14
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23
Joined: 27 Apr 2016
Member No.: 84,013



Cheers for all you comments - I do appreciate the feedback. I just wanted to know where I stand before I decided what to do next. I do understand the need for calming areas.
I've sent the image to many of my friends who can't remember noticing another calming zone which has a set up like this. ie huge chevrons signs. No bollards.
I won't go into the reason for the distraction but it involved a couple of drunk idiots next to my car. I'm obviously going to take the blame but what I wanted to do was get it off my chest that I still believe this set up for calming traffic is totally incorrect. They are using signs which should be on duel carriage ways or roundabouts not on a side street. I can't agree that this is right and think they must have had a few spare in the warehouse to get rid of (joke).
I do feel the motorist gets a bad hand from councils. I work night shift and the amount of roads which are in total darkness now is ridiculous - Councils saving money by not putting street lights on...it's unsafe for everyone. Newcastle Council are a joke at the moment as the amount of pot holes in or around the city is astonishing - so to is the lack of paint to inform drivers there are speed humps. How can you see a speed hump in total darkness with no painted triangle? They just blend into the road. The amount of times I've hit a speed hump hard is a joke. (yes, doing 20 mph too before someone says I shouldn't speed) :-)
Anyway - thanks for your views and honesty.
Anyone know of a cheap / decent dent removal guy in Newcastle?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr Meldrew
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 15:59
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 546
Joined: 31 Aug 2015
From: 19 Riverbank
Member No.: 79,151



Highway Authorities are responsible for ensuring correct standards of signing on their roads as only they can erect traffic signs or permit their erection (the police also have certain responsibilities). The types of signs available for use are prescribed by the regulations and there must not only be uniformity of signs, but also uniformity in their use. The absence of uniformity in use is objectionable and could impair road safety, so says Traffic Signs Manual, Chapter 1, 3. Legal Aspects and Responsibilities for Signs.

Chevrons

The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016, Schedule 2, Part 6, Diagram 515:

“Sharp deviation of route”
(Sharp change in the direction of a road)

The Manual goes on (4. Functions…), “Signs are used to control and guide traffic and to promote road safety. They should only be used where they can usefully serve these functions. Warning signs will not, for instance, promote road safety if used widely where there is no unusual degree of danger.”

For what it’s worth, I think the OP should consider whether the Authority has acted beyond their powers by installing the signs if contrary to the intended warning prescribed by the regulations, especially if there is not the unusual degree of danger described by the sign.

According to the Manual, (3. Legal…) illegal signs on public highways are an obstruction and the possible consequences of erecting or permitting the erection of obstructions may be severe for those responsible and could lay themselves open to a claim for damages for example, if the obstruction were the cause of accident, or of injury in a collision.

Edited for clarity.

This post has been edited by Mr Meldrew: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 18:23


--------------------
I do tend to have a bee in my bonnet re failing to consider and fairness
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
peterguk
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 16:28
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,735
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



QUOTE (Mr Meldrew @ Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 15:59) *
For what it’s worth, I think the OP should consider whether the Authority has acted beyond their powers by installing the signs, if contrary to the intended warning prescribed by the regulations, especially if there is not the unusual degree of danger described by the sign.

According to the Manual, (3. Legal…) illegal signs on public highways are an obstruction and the possible consequences of erecting or permitting the erection of obstructions may be severe for those responsible and could lay themselves open to a claim for damages for example, if the obstruction were the cause of accident, or of injury in a collision.


But does any of the above trump knowing of a stationery obstruction and driving into it?


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 16:43
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (peterguk @ Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 16:28) *
QUOTE (Mr Meldrew @ Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 15:59) *
For what it’s worth, I think the OP should consider whether the Authority has acted beyond their powers by installing the signs, if contrary to the intended warning prescribed by the regulations, especially if there is not the unusual degree of danger described by the sign.

According to the Manual, (3. Legal…) illegal signs on public highways are an obstruction and the possible consequences of erecting or permitting the erection of obstructions may be severe for those responsible and could lay themselves open to a claim for damages for example, if the obstruction were the cause of accident, or of injury in a collision.


But does any of the above trump knowing of a stationery obstruction and driving into it?


Especially as the sign is showing "a sharp deviation of route"
Telling drivers to turn or they will hit the little island some bloke left in the road biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 18:36
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,265
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



I'm struugling to understand how reversing came into it?

Was it a case of, 'oh I've missed that one' and having a second go?


--------------------
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 12:30) *
Neil is good at working backwards.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
notmeatloaf
post Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 18:39
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,306
Joined: 4 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,659



QUOTE (Neil B @ Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 18:36) *
I'm struugling to understand how reversing came into it?

Was it a case of, 'oh I've missed that one' and having a second go?

Taxi driver perogative, there is no piece of road that isn't suitable for sudden u-turns or high speed reversing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 11:55
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here