Has anyone read the article on the front of todays Star about the guy who bought David Beckhams BMW X5 SUV?

He drove over a pothole in Rotherham which punctured the tyre and damaged the "special American Alloy", causing £1000 damage. He is demanding to be compensated by Rotherham council for the damage!

Isn't the purpose of SUV's that they can drive on rough terrain?

Surely if it can't handle a pothole it's the vehicles fault, not the council tax payers of Rotherham.

More to the point, what in the name of all things holy was a non-story like that doing on the front page of The Star anyway! Total waste of space.

Bit like Beckham really.

Here here hailbut!

Originally posted by Nelly
....Isn't the purpose of SUV's that they can drive on rough terrain?
Surely if it can't handle a pothole it's the vehicles fault, not the council tax payers of Rotherham.
I think that's irrelevant. If there is a pot hole in the road that's capable of damaging wheels, then the council should fix it. As a Road Tax payer that's what I expect. If my wheels were ever damaged by a pot hole and I could prove it, I would claim as well. If more of us complained then we might not have to put up with the frankly disgusting state of our roads.

I saw it earlier on the way home from work and after laughing at it being front page then thought how it came about getting there - who gives a toss about Becks' old car?

More to the point, how did the Star become aware of it?...... Look at me, I've bought Beckhams old car???? :rolleyes:

sorry but it is nothing to do with ROAD TAX it is council tax that pays for the upkeep of roads and paths etc...., but what crap wheels are they if they cannot manage a paltry 4 inch deep pothole ?

I liked the bit about him having to contact Beckham's parents to find out where he bought his replacement tyres from! Yeah, right......

Originally posted by Halibut
More to the point, what in the name of all things holy was a non-story like that doing on the front page of The Star anyway! Total waste of space.

I think it's good that nothing worse has happened....for a change

here's to more front page uninteresting, none crime relating drivel

I feel soooo sorry for him. Lets get a collection going for him.


Pillock!!

Originally posted by playman
sorry but it is nothing to do with ROAD TAX it is council tax that pays for the upkeep of roads and paths etc...., but what crap wheels are they if they cannot manage a paltry 4 inch deep pothole ?

Regardless of which tax maintains the upkeep of our roads, they are probably the worst in Europe, which means that it would be a great idea if our local government actually spent some of this money on these roads instead of on whatever hairbrained scheme they have up their sleeve next. I've been to countries that we would consider almost third world in comparison to the UK but they in general have much better roads than us which in turn are kept in a much better state of repair.
Anyway, how would you like to hit a 4" deep pothole? Not only could this damage the best of wheels but also cause potentially life threatening damage to the tyre as well, then who'd be complaining???

Originally posted by owlface
Regardless of which tax maintains the upkeep of our roads, they are probably the worst in Europe, which means that it would be a great idea if our local government actually spent some of this money on these roads instead of on whatever hairbrained scheme they have up their sleeve next. I've been to countries that we would consider almost third world in comparison to the UK but they in general have much better roads than us which in turn are kept in a much better state of repair.
Anyway, how would you like to hit a 4" deep pothole? Not only could this damage the best of wheels but also cause potentially life threatening damage to the tyre as well, then who'd be complaining???

How come (as far as we know) HE is the only one complaining, what happened to the thousands of people not driving a footballers ex car who must have gone over this pothole. Where are their stories on the front page of our paper.

Originally posted by taxman
How come (as far as we know) HE is the only one complaining, what happened to the thousands of people not driving a footballers ex car who must have gone over this pothole. Where are their stories on the front page of our paper.

They probably didn't complain as they were probably too busy spending an hour and 250 quid in the local Kwik Fit.

Originally posted by owlface
They probably didn't complain as they were probably too busy spending an hour and 250 quid in the local Kwik Fit.

Surely some sort of class action may be in order then rather than some prat who bought the car because he thought it might be an investment then proceeded to drive the bloody thing thus increasing its non Beckham mileage and surely leading to depreciation

Frankly I don't think it's the vehicle that is the issue, more the state of our roads and why we keep on putting up with them.
Perhaps it is that good old English trait of thinking "well we could be a lot worse off so we mustn't grumble" that is keeping this country the s**thole that it is.
If we complained vehemently to the correct people about things that p**s us off instead of just mumbling a few irritated comments to our friends and relatives, a hell of a lot more would be done to sort things like this out.

The guy in the Star who bought Beckhams car... Is a Whore!

What about the pothole that is David Beckham that is damaging England

on 2nd august, 2004, i was nearly killed when i was going around a bend on my push bike, went over a section of broken up road and head long into a tree. Having tried to get compensation for all the injuries i suffered (and there were a lot) i was told i'm not likely to get anything, because they regularly inspected it, and thats all they need to do to be exempt from being sued. They don't even have to repair the damage, just inspect it. Hence why 16 months on from the accident, the road is still in the same condition, maybe worse. The main reason they are exempt, it becaise of the number of people who claimed off the council for stubbing a toe on an out of line flag stone.

Not that i'm bitter in any way...............parasites.

So, if this guy with the bent wheel ends up winning compensation for the damage to the wheel. it's a total injustice.

You have my sympathies Michael. It is a total injustice.

But the council has to take this stance because of all the fraudulant claims from people advised to do so by w***ing solicitors that take most of the claim themselves for a fee.

Originally posted by Nelly
Has anyone read the article on the front of todays Star about the guy who bought David Beckhams BMW X5 SUV?

He drove over a pothole in Rotherham which punctured the tyre and damaged the "special American Alloy", causing £1000 damage. He is demanding to be compensated by Rotherham council for the damage!

Isn't the purpose of SUV's that they can drive on rough terrain?

Surely if it can't handle a pothole it's the vehicles fault, not the council tax payers of Rotherham.

Not at all, damage has been caused to his car because Rotherham council are negligent in their maintainance of the roads. Ofcourse they should pay up, it's their fault!

Most councils pay out millions in vehicle compensation claims each year, because it's cheaper to pay for the vehicles to be repaired than to maintain the roads.

Originally posted by ibetyoulook
But the council has to take this stance because of all the fraudulant claims from people advised to do so by w***ing solicitors that take most of the claim themselves for a fee.

However, though the council have their own "in house" legal team (solicitors, barristers etc.), they still use £140 pph barristers to defend these kind of cases. Surely they should use their own team of "experts" rather than other "external" companies??

Originally posted by michael_v2
on 2nd august, 2004, i was nearly killed when i was going around a bend on my push bike, went over a section of broken up road and head long into a tree. Having tried to get compensation for all the injuries i suffered (and there were a lot) i was told i'm not likely to get anything, because they regularly inspected it, and thats all they need to do to be exempt from being sued. They don't even have to repair the damage, just inspect it. Hence why 16 months on from the accident, the road is still in the same condition, maybe worse. The main reason they are exempt, it becaise of the number of people who claimed off the council for stubbing a toe on an out of line flag stone.

Not that i'm bitter in any way...............parasites.

So, if this guy with the bent wheel ends up winning compensation for the damage to the wheel. it's a total injustice.

I don't know the specifics of your case, but Sheffield City council regularly pay out compensation for vehicle damage from potholes, they have a department specifically for it. It's cheaper to pay for vehicle damage than to fix the roads apparently.

I'd say if the guy *doesn't* get compensation, then that would be the injustice!

If the guy swerved to avoid that pothole he may have hit another car or pedestrian and killed someone, so avoiding potholes isn't always possible.

The council will be paying out on this one, no doubt about it.

Nothing new here, the Star ran a storey a couple of years ago when they found out that the council pays more out in compensation for the **** roads than they do in maintainance.

Originally posted by ibetyoulook
You have my sympathies Michael. It is a total injustice.

But the council has to take this stance because of all the fraudulant claims from people advised to do so by w***ing solicitors that take most of the claim themselves for a fee.

The council could easily avoid *all* compensation claims by simply fixing the roads!

Obviously they're going to send a scarey letter telling you you have no case, they don't want to pay up, but the reality is that if the road isn't good and an expert is prepared to testify that the road caused the damage, then they will pay everytime!

The original point was.. SUV vehicles of this nature are meant to be designed to drive anywhere (up mountains etc), that's one of the arguements for them, when people question there un-enviromentally frendlyness of them.

The guy spent half the article listing the special features of his vehicle, then ends by saying "a pothole damaged my wheel, the council must pay". When surely it was a fault of the tyre or alloy.

I have complete sympathy with a cyclist or small car driver who suffers a similar fate, but they don't get on the front page of the Star - they'd probably be lucky to get onto the letters page!

Originally posted by Nelly
The original point was.. SUV vehicles of this nature are meant to be designed to drive anywhere (up mountains etc), that's one of the arguements for them, when people question there un-enviromentally frendlyness of them.

The guy spent half the article listing the special features of his vehicle, then ends by saying "a pothole damaged my wheel, the council must pay". When surely it was a fault of the tyre or alloy.

I have complete sympathy with a cyclist or small car driver who suffers a similar fate, but they don't get on the front page of the Star - they'd probably be lucky to get onto the letters page!

I suspect they're on the front page of the Star because the Star has a bee in it's bonnet about the state of the roads, they've run a number of articles over the last few years to this effect.

I personally don't think it matters what vehicle is involved, regardless of whether it's a 4x4 or not. If you hit anything in any vehicle at 30mph, then you are going to cause damage.

4x4's can go offroad, but no-one is suggesting they can go offroad at speed. Unless we expect 4x4 owners to drive around the streets at 5mph then the arguement is largely irrelevant.

Potholes simply shouldn't be on the road, the council has a responsibility to fix them, if they don't they are negligent...

Originally posted by Magilla
I suspect they're on the front page of the Star because the Star has a bee in it's bonnet about the state of the roads, they've run a number of articles over the last few years to this effect.

Abdul suspects it was just a very slow news day ;)

Originally posted by michael_v2
on 2nd august, 2004, i was nearly killed when i was going around a bend on my push bike, went over a section of broken up road and head long into a tree. Having tried to get compensation for all the injuries i suffered (and there were a lot) i was told i'm not likely to get anything, because they regularly inspected it, and thats all they need to do to be exempt from being sued. They don't even have to repair the damage, just inspect it. Hence why 16 months on from the accident, the road is still in the same condition, maybe worse. The main reason they are exempt, it becaise of the number of people who claimed off the council for stubbing a toe on an out of line flag stone.

Not that i'm bitter in any way...............parasites.

So, if this guy with the bent wheel ends up winning compensation for the damage to the wheel. it's a total injustice.

perhaps the key to getting compensation is to claim that it was beckhams old bike you were riding

arggg i am only just resisiting a comment about victoria beckham!!!!

dave

Originally posted by Magilla
I don't know the specifics of your case, but Sheffield City council regularly pay out compensation for vehicle damage from potholes, they have a department specifically for it. It's cheaper to pay for vehicle damage than to fix the roads apparently.

I'd say if the guy *doesn't* get compensation, then that would be the injustice!



So, the council think that damage to an innanimate object such as an alloy wheel, is more important than the risk crap roads present to peoples lives. i wonder if they would have had the same thoughts if i had actually died on the road that day.

Maybe if they spent the money they waste on stupid new junctions, changing the colour of the tarmac and speed bumps that don't actually slow anyone down, there would be more money to fill in the bloody holes that are all over the roads in sheffield. The road infrastructure in sheffield is a bloody joke. I support the star in anything they have to say regarding sheffields crap roads. And to think, i tax my car every year, as do most people. where's the new fresh tarmac that we pay for.

Originally posted by ibetyoulook
You have my sympathies Michael. It is a total injustice.

But the council has to take this stance because of all the fraudulant claims from people advised to do so by w***ing solicitors that take most of the claim themselves for a fee.

i know people who have claimed for stupid little things. i also know of some one who claimed to have fallen over on a path and fractured their leg, when they had actually done it at home. It's because of people like this that honest people can't claim for legitimate injuries caused by highways neglegence

Originally posted by michael_v2
So, the council think that damage to an innanimate object such as an alloy wheel, is more important than the risk crap roads present to peoples lives. i wonder if they would have had the same thoughts if i had actually died on the road that day.

Maybe if they spent the money they waste on stupid new junctions, changing the colour of the tarmac and speed bumps that don't actually slow anyone down, there would be more money to fill in the bloody holes that are all over the roads in sheffield. The road infrastructure in sheffield is a bloody joke. I support the star in anything they have to say regarding sheffields crap roads. And to think, i tax my car every year, as do most people. where's the new fresh tarmac that we pay for.

i apologise that i went off on one with the rant of the other day. I suppoase i should be gratefull that i survived. :)

How much did the car cost? Does anyone know? Just wondering.

Originally posted by clairerob
How much did the car cost? Does anyone know? Just wondering.

think it was £80,000

OMG you can buy a house for that. I just dont get why people spend that much on cars.

know of someone who spent £230,000 on a Bentley Azure - local boy too!!