Hi Folks,
My Parents have received a letter from their council claiming my parents have damaged the paving stones on the pavement outside their house and are charging them ~£475 to fix the pavement. According to the council it's unsafe as someone could trip on it and hurt themselves, so the council must fix it. The council are claiming the builders who recently repaved my parents' driveway to make it easier access for my disabled dad damaged the pavement and therefore my parents need to pay for it.
Council claim they take yearly sweep of the pavements have photos from 2024 and 2025 which shows some new damage. I've asked the council for the before and after pictures to find out exactly what damage they are holding us responsible for.
My parents obviously don't track every pavement crack but in general the pavement has been in a bad state for many years with many cracked paving slabs outside their house and down the whole road so my parents genuinely don't believe the builders did any new damage, its just normal ware and tear. It's also a busy used for parking due to nearby schools and train stations so anyone could have driven their car / SUV / delivery van onto the pavement and damaged the pavement.
Google Street view from 2021 shows the there are cracks to the pavement, in addition mum and dad are looking to see if they have any photos of outside the house to prove the cracks where there beforehand. Will take this to the council to see what they have to say.
Council are also saying work is scheduled to be completed in Feb and my parents need to pay up otherwise it'll be forwarded to debt collectors. So this has got my mum super stressed.
Anyone have experience or knowledge in this area? I would really appreciate some help on how to fight this?
Surely the council have to provide more evidence that the damage was clearly done by my parents or people acting on my parents behalf. They can't just claim the crack is outside their house so my parents must have done it.
Many thanks in advance ...
Blimey.
Part of our road is paved in 'flags' and all of them are cracked - are their any trees on the road, as that's where most of the damage has come from on our road. It's bad enough that I had to rescue a neighbour from around the corner when she badly tripped on the pavement - really nasty fall.
Do they drive over the pavement to reach the road?
No trees on the road.
My parents do not drive over the pavement to reach the road, they have a dropped kerb portion they drive over which is tarmac / asphalt stuff not paving slabs.
So I think the council are complaining about a different part to what my parents drive over to reach their driveway.
No help but I'm pretty sure that trip hazards [on pavements] are big thing for councils and claims can cost them a lot of money. I'm not surprised they're pursuing it.
(and £475 sounds cheap tbh)
It sounds a bit strange. Is it definitely a genuine letter from the council and not some kind of scam?
Yep genuinely from the council, mum rang them up to double check.
If you have photos from 2001, presumably with the old drive, then the onus will be on the council to prove they were new. Send them that information and tell them there is no evidence to prove that it was a contractor as opposed to school parking of an suv. You would welcome evidence that proves it miat be contractors rather than the latter. Are there cracks of similar size up and down the road? Ask their plans to fix those and who will be paying.
They are trying it on. Push back with reasonable demands for evidence to support their case. Its 2.5 billable hours for a solicitor. Do you know any friendly ones?
Doesn't sound right, I'd love to see this got to court, the burden of proof about how the damage occurred would be on the council. If it was the builders who damaged the pavement it should be them the council should be pursuing, not your parents.
Either a scam or a phishing exercise from the council.
Basically your parents have received and unsubstantiated invoice from the council, I'd be telling the council where to stick the invoice. Debt collectors letters can usually be safely ignored unless they come after a court claim.
If it's not the dropped section they drive over, the damage could have been caused by anyone parking on the pavement, the council have no way of knowing who caused it, do they?
Hang on.... the bit they drive over... was that resurfaced by the builders? If they can show that work has caused nearby slabs to be undermined and break, it's a whole different story.
If no evidence has been provided:
https://www.gov.uk/understand-how-your-council-works/make-a-complaint
Debt collectors mean nothing unless it's been to court and you've lost and not settled, it's just an invoice at this stage.
Formal complaint to the council would be the first step, if nothing else it should force a conversation to explain properly why they think you are liable rather then just strong-arming you into paying up with vague threats.
Then based on their reasoning they may drop it, or hang themselves by citing as load of tosh as to why you in particular should be accountable.
If it was the builders who damaged the pavement it should be them the council should be pursuing, not your parents.
I think technically the OPs parents are the 'employer' of the builders so they are responsible for damage caused to neighbouring property (i.e. the pavement) by their 'employees' (i.e. the builders) and the parents should claim from the builders/whoever actually caused the damage or maybe pass that information on to the council.
Probably not helpful in this case but...
Some years ago, a contractor delivered to my house with a HIAB and managed to put an outrigger through the tarmac pavement. We called the council, and rather than a bill, they thanked us for alerting them to the problem and sent a guy around with a shovel of tarmac to fill the hole. Very different to the OP's experience.
As per another recent 'liability' thread - FFFF and get these photos before deciding on course of action. Two things I would do as part of this are to make sure it is a genuine letter - if council write back saying 'eh?' that'll be a clue; secondly in this request say clearly that you dispute the liability and cost while you evaluate the photos they supply against others you have of the house. IANAL but this means they cannot pursue additional costs until they have 'proven' that the debt is genuinely on you to pay (over simplification but broadly right). I'd at this stage be asking for verification of why they say the builders caused it, as opposed to Joe Public parking on the pavement and out of your control.
The 'get this done in Feb' sounds a bit scammy, clear technique to put pressure on to resolve quickly so don't buy that one - can't escalate if it is in dispute.
Once that's clarified - if they can prove it was the builders, then I'd be approaching them with this proof and getting them to foot the bill. Again, IANAL and this might be complex about whether you as commissioners of the work are liable to the council or whether you can just duck out and get the council to pursue the builders. I suspect the former, but if there is proof then I would think it is relatively easy to then make a claim on the builder, unless there's something in the contract you had with them that said they aren't liable for any incidental additional costs....usually a decent builder will have something in about making good any damage / returning site to previous state.
I also wonder if that is part of the 'defence' you may have - a bit like landlords charging for repairs when tenancy ends, they can only charge for return to as-was minus fair wear and tear, they can't charge for return to pristine (eg: might be able to charge for carpet cleaning, can't charge for new carpets). If you have evidence the pavement was ****ed anyway, if the builders have ****ed it a bit more then I'd argue that you aren't liable to repair it completely and in fact, it needed doing anyway so why should you pay at all?
I also wonder if that is part of the 'defence' you may have - a bit like landlords charging for repairs when tenancy ends, they can only charge for return to as-was minus fair wear and tear, they can't charge for return to pristine (eg: might be able to charge for carpet cleaning, can't charge for new carpets).
I would think the expected lifespan of a pavement under normal usage to be very long unlike carpet, etc, so I'd be surprised if that would work. As I said before I also doubt that the total cost to send a team out to repair some pavement is more than £450 but maybe it is!
You can't defend yourself if you don't know why they think you are liable - that's why it's important to make a formal complaint, get on the front foot and it's all documented... they have 'mysterious pictures'? ok lets see them or they can bugger off.
Arguing about wear and tear is almost like you admitting partial liability so don't jump the gun here, first things first.
The builders would have liability insurance that would cover the consequences of any damage they cause - so the first step really if the council think its the builders actions that have caused the damage then the its a sensible step to pass the claim on to them. (I'd be less than their excess to be honest)
Seems a bit buck-passy but the builders will perhaps be better at arguing with the council than your elderly folks are.
It's up to the council really to demonstrate in what way the builders are responsible for the damage - that they've parked heavy plant or similar on the pavement or a skip maybe - which if they haven't actually witnessed doesn't really give them a leg to stand on - Or is it something about the nature of the work they've undertaken on your parents land that has had some knock on effect on the pavement - undermined it in some way perhaps
To clarify through - When you say the builders repaved the driveway - do you mean repaired or upgraded an existing driveway? Or created a new driveway where there wasn't one before. If its the latter then there are formaiities that are part of that that process include notifying the council in advance and agreeing improvements to the pavement and curb because there will be traffic passing over it. So the liability issue might be to do with having created a driveway where there wasn't one before and not taking the correct steps in doing it
I would think the expected lifespan of a pavement under normal usage to be very long unlike carpet, etc, so I'd be surprised if that would work.
Yes, but as per OP Streetview 2021 shows it was already ****ed and the council weren't pursuing them to repair it then, so why now it's (possibly, as yet unproven) more ****ed is the cost now on them. I certainly wouldn't be accepting whole cost, I'd be saying that it's on them to keep the pavements in good repair so they do it, and keeping a partial 'goodwill' gesture as a possible option if they continue to pursue.
You're right though £475 is dead cheap....
Has anyone actually spoken to the Contractor?
Some, especially when it comes to driveways etc, take before & after shots of their working area as they are getting used to local authorities or neighbours claiming for all sorts of nonsense.
Maybe a quick call along the lines of "The council are alleging you damaged the pavement" might illicit what you need.
I wonder if a neighbour made a complaint - either because of work or perceived driving over or parking on the pavement the pavement?
There are literally thousands of miles of pavements outside houses in any council area - I really don't see them photographing before and after shots of every road every year - and even if they did paying someone to check the photos for damage
If you go onto google maps and pop your parents address in, on the street view you can go back through previous years images. for example I can see from last year back to 2009 for my property with photos every 12months of so, you should have clear independent visual evidence that damage and degradation was already present and the wear and tear over the years.
in the little box with address you should see a "see more dates" tag which will then enable you to back through previous photos of the street view with pavements etc..
I wonder if a neighbour made a complaint - either because of work or perceived driving over or parking on the pavement the pavement?
Ooh, good shout. At the very least, draw up a list of who might have complained and plan retaliation. That would keep my MiL occupied for weeks, as happy as a pig in shit.
If they have photographic evidence ask them to supply it, with dates.
If they have photographic evidence ask them to supply it, with dates.
That's what I'm saying - don't do the councils homework for them by talking to the contractors etc... make a formal complaint and force a documented sensible conversation with proof provided (or not), and then take it from there. If these secret pictures don't proove anything then the buck stops there.
Could you use something like a SAR or FOI request to get the information?
https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/official-information/
Other option might be to contact a local councillor for help.
Sounds very scammy to me. Did they contact the council through a reputable independent number (as opposed to phoning one on the letter?).
Thank you all for the feedback and advice. I'll speak to council requesting to see the evidence and take it from there.
I’d be amazed if they could prove that a cracked paving slab was broken by your builder!
were the bulders vans parked up on the pavement , and potentialy moving or breaking any pavers? Esp if they were bouncing up kerb to park half on half off the road,
this would have annoyed the neighbours and a retalitory counter strike would be a call to the council.
See if the builders have any dashcam footage perhaps to show the state of the pavement before works were started
OP - do your parents have legal cover on their home insurance? This seems like the sort of case they'd like to write the response for.
In any case, its hard to see how a homeowner has any vicarious liability for actions on an independent contractor, outside the curtilage of their property, especially if their actions were not following your explicit instructions.
OP, your parents first point of contact in this is their local councilor as they should (if they are doing their job properly..) know exactly who in the council to talk to about this and will be able to speak directly to people in charge. AFAIK the responsibility for the pavement and road rests with the council, not the property owner unless its clear that unauthorised works/damage have been done to it and there is evidence of this. A letter saying pay up for repairs to the pavement by February or we'll send the debt collectors round places the council on very shaky legal ground as it doesn't seem to contain any clear proof (other than, "well the crack wasn't there last year...") of your parents being at fault or indeed liability.
Councillor first, then probably some legal advice (a chat with the local Citizens advice Bureau is advisable before going to a solicitor)
Thank you all for the feedback and advice. I'll speak to council requesting to see the evidence and take it from there.
Speak to the council via the medium of a formal complaint so they have to deal with it correctly.
Phonecalls and conversations have a habit of not being documented or 'forgotten'.
Make sure you keep all correspondence in writing both ways.
I wouldn't talk to anyone on the phone, I would want everything in writing (I have been stung in the past by talking to somebody on the phone who told me not to worry they will sort it, only to find out later they hadn't and they then denied the contact) I think it is unlikely the council keep such detailed photographic evidence of pavements, so IMO something else has prompted this ie as above a neighbour complaint, so the story spun in the letter is likely already a sign of acting in bad faith (maybe just a standard cover story to not identify complainants). If they change the tune later and admit there was a complainant, lying in the initial contact isn't a good look if challenged in court or the local government ombudsman.
Also even talking about debt collectors straight from the off is an attempt at intimidation, that would get my back right up, and make it more likely for me to fight it than attempt to compromise. Given the amount if it was edging towards probable that the builders caused some damage I might have just paid it, but throwing that intimidation in right from the off no ****ing chance.
Of course keep everything polite, but also be firm and direct. Photos of damage is not evidence of who caused it, but is a start, if they can provide the photos showing damage, then ask for the evidence that the builder caused it.
If there are regularly cars parked on the street, I would start taking photos, a dozen timestamped snaps on a smart phone of various cars parked in the spot is probably far more evidence then they could muster.
This smells like a scam to me ...
It'd be pretty easy for some dodgy person/outfit to forge a letter (along with a forged council letterhead & crest) purporting to be from the council, asking vulnerable homeowners to pay up under the threat of bailiffs/courts etc.
When you rang the council, did you ring the number on the (possibly forged) letterhead, it did you go through the official switchboard number on the council's (legitimate) website?
I might be barking up the wrong tree, but don't assume the letter is legit without independently checking it.
Pop round to get some pics of the pavement before the council start work, trip over said broken and very dangerous broken paver the council are fully aware of and get your counter claim for personal injury in!
Pop round to get some pics of the pavement before the council start work, trip over said broken and very dangerous broken paver the council are fully aware of and get your counter claim for personal injury in!
Checkmate! Lol
This smells like a scam to me ...
It'd be pretty easy for some dodgy person/outfit to forge a letter (along with a forged council letterhead & crest) purporting to be from the council, asking vulnerable homeowners to pay up under the threat of bailiffs/courts etc.
When you rang the council, did you ring the number on the (possibly forged) letterhead, it did you go through the official switchboard number on the council's (legitimate) website?
I might be barking up the wrong tree, but don't assume the letter is legit without independently checking it.
That's why a formal complaint is the first step, if the councils reply is "eh?" then that's the end of the matter for you and the council know they there's a problem they need to address.
Everyone's a winner.
Speaking to some potato on the phone won't get you anywhere, you've been threatened so make it formal.
I think my reply would be,
- We didn't damage the street, prove otherwise or gwan **** yourself,
- If you can prove it, take it up with the builders and their liability insurance.
I suspect the coucil are planning to repair a section of pavement and sent their inspector along to look at it. He saw your parents builders doing some work and thought "Aha, they can pay for that section.". Check with their neighgbours to see if they have had any similar letters.
I would love the see the council prove the damage was caused by your building work. Did they, or a nopsey neighbour, have 24/7 video surveilence? I suspect it si just a "try this first and if they complain we can alway back down"
Unless there is a very obvious NEW dip in the pavement or a whole section of broken slabs different to the rest of the path, I am not sure they will be able to prove anything. Make sure it is not the council doing the assessment of damage and also the judgement of blame as that gives a clear conflict of interest.
"I would love the see the council prove the damage was caused by your building work."
This is the crux of the matter, no proof=no liability.
Where are these elusive photos that prove your (or your subcontractors) negligence?
It's time for a bit of 'show and tell', as Christoper Walken famously said in hit movie 'true romance'. 🤣
Newly elected Reform councillors in charge by any chance?
Seems scammy to me. Especially the threat of bailiffs. Bailiffs are appointed by the courts and not summoned by council jobsworths.
"I would love the see the council prove the damage was caused by your building work."
If the pavement is flagstones I'd question whether the pavement is of a spec that would allow a drive to be accessed across it - which is why I asked up there whether the drive the builders built is new or an improvement to an existing one. If there has always been a drive there, with a corresponding dropped curb etc then fair enough. But if it's a new drive you're supposed to get permission for that from the council and making suitable changes to the pavement and curb is something they'd require you to do as part of the work.
So the council might not be suggesting that the builders damaged the pavement, but that the pavement is now damaged as a result of vehicles driving across the pavement because there is now a drive there.
Newly elected Reform councillors in charge by any chance?
Seems scammy to me. Especially the threat of bailiffs. Bailiffs are appointed by the courts and not summoned by council jobsworths.
I suspect, politics aside, that all councils are skint, so if they can palm off a £400 maintenence task onto an unsuspecting resident by sending a cheeky letter or two, that's good value for money (for them). Simple ecomomics.
If it only costs 400-500 to fix, were not talking about major subsidence or whatever here, were talking about re-laying a few flags. The subbies gonna charge at least 150 just to show up, so the job itself is really only about £250 worth of work.
Footpaths in many towns, and roads too, for that matter, are crisscrossed with patchwork lines of tarmac, including where proper paving slabs were laid, then crudely lifted and filled in with tarmac by endless numbers of contractors working on drainage, gas, electricity and more recently fibre optic lines for all the various broadband networks, so it’s entirely possible that a contractor for a broadband network has put in fibres for a whole area, then tried to sell their services to as many people as possible, so damage to the pavement could easily be as a result of this type of work, and the council haven’t a clue who to blame it on!
Fibre was put in all across Chippenham, including in front of my house, with little access points in front of every house. When I had my broadband upgraded to fibre, the engineer put the necessary equipment into my house, then had to wait for a cherrypicker to turn up so the fibre could be attached to a utility pole on the opposite side of the road, which is attached to a point just below the guttering, I have no connection to any fibre network that’s been installed along the road, and there must be hundreds of thousands of installations in pavements and roads all over the country, which most councils probably have no idea about where they go!
I would imagine you can't just dig up the pavement to install fibre/whatever without clearing it with the council who will have records of who's done what where.
If you or or your parents don't feel able to properly take this on then it might be worth getting one of their elected Councillors on board. They can do a very good job of holding council officers to account and I know from experience that, when a Councillor starts asking questions, council departments do tend to sharpen things up a bit.
Even if you sort this yourself, might be worth raising it with a Councillor as it could be the case that the council are taking this approach with a lot of residents, some of whom won't be able to fight it.
Newly elected Reform councillors in charge by any chance?
Seems scammy to me. Especially the threat of bailiffs. Bailiffs are appointed by the courts and not summoned by council jobsworths.
The OP didn't mention bailiffs.
debt collectors != bailiffs
debt collectors != bailiffs
I mean, technically you're right, but in common speak I think that's splitting hairs a little...
Speak to the council via the medium of a formal complaint so they have to deal with it correctly.
Phonecalls and conversations have a habit of not being documented or 'forgotten'.
I think that's bad advice! Yes the complaints department will make sure there is a response in a set time and document the response - but in my experience a "formal" approach is likely to make them more entrenched, and as you actually have nothing to complain about other than perhaps the tone of the letter the council, if they believe they are correct, will not change its position.
You can have a phone call and take notes, then send a copy of those notes to the council. If it's a scam (and as presented by the OP it does sound like it) then you'll probably know quicker with a phone call. If it's real, people are more likely to be frank on the phone than in a response which goes through the scrutiny of a complaints official (who removes certain words/phrases).
Moreover, once you get nowhere with the complaint, your next stage is presumably the ombudsman, which will take months. IF your phonecalls get nowhere, or commitments to send photos etc don't materialise, THEN you have grounds for a complaint. Right now, you'll just get laughed at (internally) and then an unhelpful formal response just before the time limit expires.
debt collectors != bailiffs
I mean, technically you're right, but in common speak I think that's splitting hairs a little...
No he's 100% right. The council raise invoices all the time which when unpaid they can, and will, pass to debt collection agencies without going to court. The vast majority of unpaid debts never go near a court.
No he's 100% right. The council raise invoices all the time which when unpaid they can, and will, pass to debt collection agencies without going to court. The vast majority of unpaid debts never go near a court.
Absolutely, but in day-to-day speak people commonly use the terms interchangeably (or is that just me).
" It's also a busy used for parking due to nearby schools and train stations so anyone could have driven their car / SUV / delivery van onto the pavement and damaged the pavement."
Its their property, (the councils), so surely the burden of proof of WHO damaged it is theirs. I dont see how they have a leg to stand on, unless they have a video of the slabs acutally being damaged, and your parents are visible as the culprits.
Did your parents ring the number on the letter or get the councils number from somewhere else (off the website)? I would certainly do some more digging, but even if it is real i would be telling them to get in the sea, this seems positively predatory.
Probably go and read the context of the posts you were replying to again - starting with Oceanskippers.No he's 100% right. The council raise invoices all the time which when unpaid they can, and will, pass to debt collection agencies without going to court. The vast majority of unpaid debts never go near a court.
Absolutely, but in day-to-day speak people commonly use the terms interchangeably (or is that just me).
Probably go and read the context of the posts you were replying to again - starting with Oceanskippers.
Thanks. I'd somehow missed a few posts. Either the forum's glitching, or I am, probably the latter 🙂
Thank you folks for the feedback and help, I really appreciate it.
I'm going round my parents house tonight to have a look at the letter the council have sent and check what what phone number my mum rang to make sure it really is from the council.
If it all looks legit my next steps are:
- Ask for the photos of the damaged paving slabs (if not already in the letter).
- Compare council photos with family photos taken outside of the house and google street view. Hopefully these photos help to prove damage was there before.
- If family photos are no help then, we will push back on the council to provide evidence the damage was caused by my parents (or sub contractors) as it could easily have been done by any other member of the public.
- I will also take photos of the road to show the whole road is generally in bad shape and in similar condition to outside my parents house indicating its just natural wear and tear on the pavement.
- In addition to the above find out who the local councillor is and get in touch with them to see if they can make the council see sense and behave better.
Does that all sound correct anything I've missed?
Sounds sensible to me. Hope you make progress.
Does that all sound correct anything I've missed?
It's reasonable, but it seems like you are doing a lot of work, at most it would seem to be the contractor's liabilty. I'll again suggest that your parents may have legal cover in their home insurance. I'm not fan of those types of policy but its the sort of thing older people do add without thinking - and I'd bet a letter from a lawyer sees some back peddling, unless there's something we don't know.