Dont Clear The Snow

[Bazile]

Given the inclement weather we have expetrienced and due to experience again ( more snow forcast).

You often see the pavements outside gates been 'cleared ' of snow .

Am i correct is thinking that if someone slips on the pavement , the person / householder that cleared the snow from the pavement can be sued for making the pavement unsafe ?

[Maydup]

Not if you put salt on it and clear it properly.

[Bazile]

Yeah , but how would you prove that you cleared it properly , if someone fell whils't walking on it

[Ric.ror]

If you put water with salt diluted on the path will that defrost the snow or am I having a blonde moment?

[ladyalex]

I am no expert, but I believe this to be a myth.

If any of the lawyers correct me, I would like them to give me an estimate of the number of suits that have been brought within ,say, the last decade.

[vulcan42]

don't think you would be in bother
http://www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/lgsl/901-950/929_winter_weather/clearing_snow_and_ice_from_pav.aspx

[heathfield]

Nothing to stop you clearing your own bit of pavement, so long as it's done in a "responsible manner". (e.g. You don't shovel it onto your neighbour's bit of pavement, and make it worse). Others who use the cleared pavement have a duty of care to look out for themselves in using it. To sue, they would have to show that you had acted maliciously or carelessly, or in a manner to cause injury, all difficult to prove.

[rockyracoon]

Most people have to clear it to get their cars off the drive, we always do the pavement infront of ours, if someone slips, how do they prove it was down to you clearing snow?

[BRIGHT SPARK]

So using the same logic if the council cleared the roads of snow and I skidded and crashed my car I could sue the council........so its a no from me.

[weecalf]

Can you jus t s ee the adverts .so you fell on purpose on a piece of pavement cleared by someone doing their best to go about the daily chores without waiting three weeks for council to clear the snow .After searching you found a pice of pavement Do not hesitate to claim and discourage the community thinking person .Contact. sue & Sue .

[Chipchopper]

Clearing snow from the pavement outside your property is not a malicious act.

Hosing down a car on your drive and allowing the water to run down and freeze on the pavement in sub zero temperatures is stupid and irresponsible.

This is where common sense will hopefully prevail

[Hopkirk]

That sounds like fun Chippy, I'll go and do it now.

[DangerUXD]

Urban myth probably based on some half truth from the US.

[Old_Geezer]

Councils are authorities and are probably able to wriggle out of responsibility. And if they do mess up again, like not fixing the potholes caused by the weather and thus damaging drivers' cars, they only pay for it, if successfully sued, with your money.

Whilst I do not know, I'd not want to risk it. If you tried to clear the pavement and left it not as safe as you thought you had, then you are responsible for the state it was left in. You did not achieve the due diligence thing. But leave things alone and the weather is all "act of God" stuff out there. Nothing to do with you.

[FredPuli43]

No. You'd need to do far more, deliberately embark upon a course of action which it was obvious to anyone, and so should have been to you, that that made that bit of pavement really dangerous when it wasn't dangerous before. That is extremely unlikely to happen. Can't think of anything short of obvious malice and hope to cause injury, when there was no risk of one before, which would give rise to an action.

[FredPuli43]

^when it was obvious^ not 'which'

[joko]

i think this stems from if you clear it by throwing boiling water on it - this usually gets rid of snow - but leaves ice behind - which is more dangerous than snow.

as long as you grit it afterwards im sure itll be fine

[askyourgran]

A few years ago I recall that a large garage had cars for sale on the forecourt, it was bad weather, snow had compacted around the cars making it difficult to view them the cars themselves were cleared of snow. When the salesman was asked about it he said that by clearing the snow they would be admitting liability if anyone fell. I still haven't worked that out.

[FredPuli43]

His 'logic', gran, was that he wanted to avoid liability as an occupier as created by the Occupiers Liability Act, 1957. It's a defence to show that any risk was both obvious to anyone and normal. The warped thinking was that if nothing was done the risk was obvious as things stood, but moving snow altered that, thereby admitting that the premises were dangerous before and might be still; not that sensible because the snow might be covering some trip hazard which the visitor could not then see and avoid. When he then tripped over it, the occupier would be liable

[askyourgran]

Thank you FredPauli, I guessed it would be something torturous.

[tonywiltshire]

Bazile, you are both right and wrong in part. You can take action against a person who clears snow from their property but I think your chances of success are very, very low. It is my view anyone who clears snow can do so without concern and Common law (based on decisions of our judges over the years) seems to agree that reasonableness is the yardstick, you may be interested to read what Victorian judge Knight-Bruce wrote in 1851 in the case of Walter v Selfe, which now sounds rather pompous but was used as late as 1994..

I think you may be correct ladyalex & UXD