Mud On Road

[davidanthony]

I recently had a car accident due to the loss of traction on a thickly mud covered road. The farmer had placed caution mud on road and a 5mph sign. However the road is on a downhill gradient and although crawling along due to other traffic, when I applied my brake there was no road traction although the ABS kicked in at all, resulting in impact with a van in front of me which had slowed to allow a farm vehicle to pass in the opposite direction. Would I have a claim against the farmer for the resulting damage ?

[fiction-factory]

Were you doing less than 5mph then david?

[murraymints]

my brother came off his bike on a muddy road where farmer's animals traversed the road and he claimed successfully !

only anecdotal mind !

[Baldric]

I think it takes more than a Farmers advisory sign to alter a Speed Limit

[Peter Pedant]

and on the other side of the coin

my brother in law came off his motorbike on mid
the lawyer backed him up to the last penny of the legal aid certificate

and then said he didnt have a chance

another anecdote

[bookbinder]

I've just googled 'mud on road causes accident', and got a lot of info.

[Khandro]

Regardless of what the farmer indicated on his sign, you were not driving commensurately with the road conditions, you had been warned of mud and you could see mud, you must have been too close to the vehicle in front and driving too fast, that's why you hit the van. Why blame the farmer?

[bednobs]

no, you have to drive approprite to the conditions (ragardless of speed limits)

[Buenchico]

https://www.nfuonline.com/ps12070-briefing-mud-on-the-road

To make a successful claim against the farmer (or contractor, as appropriate) you'd need to show that he'd been negligent by either not cleaning mud off his vehicle (where it was possible to do so) before allowing it onto the road or through not cleaning the road as soon as was practical to do so after the mud was deposited.

However if the farmer could show that
(a) he'd cleaned as much mud as possible from his vehicle before taking it onto the road ; and
(b) that he couldn't reasonably have had time to clean the road (because, for example he'd only driven along it a minute or two before you did) ;
then a court might take the view that he'd not been negligent.

[bookbinder]

Report of a court case:
http://www.fwi.co.uk/news/farmer-pays-out-10000-after-biker-skids-on-muddy-road.htm

[Khandro]

^^ He'd allowed it to 'remain' dangerous, he hadn't put up a sign, and he even admitted guilt.
Even so I still think the 18 year old girl should have been able to see the danger.

[EDDIE51]

As you were advised not to exceed 5 mph, you have no claim if you were doing 6 mph or more.
This is not a speed limit that has to be obeyed it is just advice, but if you travel at over the advised limit you do so at your own risk. The farmer has covered himself by putting the warning and advised speed on the sign.

[Davemano]

Although it is only advisory the Highway Code tells you to remain sufficiently far behind a vehicle so that you can stop in the event the front vehicle stopping without signal. The 5mph sign is not legal because it was not lawfully placed - the farmer is not a lawful authority, but he is responsible for removing the mud. This being the case I think you may have a justifiable claim even though I believe you may have been driving without due care and attention, knowing that the road was muddy and not driving accordingly. Was the mud really so thick that you slid on it or were you driving too close even though you were crawling. If you were in slow moving traffic was there other tail end bumps or just you.

[davidanthony]

Thanx. Fiction Factory, less than 5mph, crawling. Khandro, I was at least 10m from the vehicle in front. On the downhill gradient with black-ice like road conditions, a car would have slid metres with the weight of the vehicle carrying it with brakes on. The farmer created the road conditions which caused the accident. The farmer did take action to attempt to clear the road when his operations appeared to be finished. Legal opinion will indeed be sought.

[Davemano]

In view of your last remarks that 'any vehicle would have slid metres with its weight and the brakes on', why didn't the vehicle behind slide into your rear end. Also 10 metres is a long slide in a crawling along traffic.

[fiction-factory]

I think this is a matter for your insurance company- they will deal with your claim for damage to your vehicle and to the van you hit, and if they think they can revover the money successfully from the farmer they will try to make a recovery. That's what the insurance premiums are for. The only thing you would have to consider claiming for is any excess and perhaps any loss of NCD.

[joko]

you slid 10 metres?

[joko]

while being unable to stop the car going less that 5mph?

[fiction-factory]

I still think your insurance company rather than you should be the one who decides whether they want to seek to revover from the farmer.

[fiction-factory]

I was wondering- have you managed to get anywhere with this please, david?