-
Cheers, it does seems that there should have been a sign there according to DfT guidlines which might have helped me avoid it:
"D3.18.4 The “RAMP AHEAD” sign variant to diagram 7010.1 warns of a sudden change of road level which
the driver is approaching, and should be sited not less than 30 m before the ramp. It must always be used in
conjunction with the “RAMP” sign to diagram 7013. These signs should also be specified when cable crossing
41DESIGN CRITERIA
protectors are in use at traffic signal sites (see paragraph D5.10.9) and when locally fabricated or prefabricated
“humps” are used to protect pipes, cables etc. that are run across the road. Such “humps” should not be of
such a design that they are a hazard to road users, in particular cyclists and motorcyclists."It said Kier on the barriers, not sure what that tells me, I'll try and sus out what the works are tomorrow. If there's no compensation it's not a massive biggie, I'm basically ok luckily, just a little sore, paying for the wheel to get sorted will smart.
Anyone know a good sure for gravel rash? This patch on my back is weeping like an Essex housewife at Lady Di's funeral.
You are reading a single comment by @Polygon and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
Polygon
Ouch. Not nice.
Are these only utility works or a Council-led footway reinstatement and junction improvement scheme? It looks to me more like the former, but I can't really tell from the pictures. Have a look at any signs left around the site (if any) to see which it is.
The obstacle that had you off seems to be a temporary cover for some excavation they did across the carriageway. It would normally not be in place for very long and may have been set down correctly when it was installed, but may later have been shifted by the passage of vehicles over it--probably impossible to show what happened before you arrived there. I have no idea what the legal position is on whether the contractors could have been said to be negligent in that case. There are guidelines on how to secure that kind of thing temporarily. It might be possible to show that they weren't followed, but I'd think the chances of succeeding in that would be slim.
If it's a Council scheme (which I doubt somewhat), Council officers would normally be involved a little in site supervision, but the nitty-gritty would be left to the contractors, who in this case would probably be the Council's term contractors.
I must say that I'd suspect the chances of receiving compensation are slim, but IANAL, so ask someone who is.
Heal swiftly.