I've reversed into pole set up in calming area (1 foot into road) - is this pole/sign legal? |
I've reversed into pole set up in calming area (1 foot into road) - is this pole/sign legal? |
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 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 05:10
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
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 |
|
|
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? -------------------- |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 10:21
Post
#6
|
||||
Webmaster Group: Root Admin Posts: 8,205 Joined: 30 Mar 2003 From: Wokingham, UK Member No.: 2 |
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 __________________________________________________________________________
|
|||
|
||||
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 |
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. |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
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!
|
|
|
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 |
.........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 |
|
|
Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 11:29
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,768 Joined: 17 Mar 2013 Member No.: 60,602 |
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 |
|
|
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 |
|
|
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 |
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. |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
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? |
|
|
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
|
|
|
Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 16:28
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
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? -------------------- |
|
|
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 |
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 |
|
|
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? -------------------- |
|
|
Sat, 17 Feb 2018 - 18:39
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 3,306 Joined: 4 Mar 2017 Member No.: 90,659 |
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 11:55 |