Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey guys got a question for yas.

if your car is stock height and you drive into a driveway and scrap the shit out of your front bar can you sue the council for the damage? or even if you arnt stock height but are still at the legal height of 100mm? :unsure:

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/118571-got-a-question-for-yas/
Share on other sites

Why would you imagine the council would be liable for you driving your car in such a manner that it causes it to scrape against the driveway? If anything, they should sue you for damaging their driveway with your car...

Why would you imagine the council would be liable for you driving your car in such a manner that it causes it to scrape against the driveway? If anything, they should sue you for damaging their driveway with your car...

Yeah I totally agree. I don't think the council will pay for damage caused by an impact due to a drivewy lip being too high. In the same way they won't pay for damage to your car caused by an impact due to the posted speed limit being too high.

yeah, i dotn think ur gonna get much support on here, not to sound harsh, its just reality. where was the driveway anyway? is there any rule as to the angle on a driveway? coz it would make sense that any legal height car should be able to get up any driveway, within limits of course... not EVERY car and EVERY driveway, but i know alot of cars that scrape, and aint even that low

e.g. a stock skyline drivin through an intersection (not a driveway, but still...) at well below the speed limit scapes coz the road has a big mound in it, and on the dip on the other side, hits the groud with sum force. and this was on a main road crossing the princess highway

edit - i am aware the overhang is just as important as ride height, so i dont expect every car to get in every driveway, but most should be able too

Edited by VB-

From a legal point of view, the council are pretty well sewn-up. That's not to say that they're above the law, but you would need a tightly strung case to get them to concede anything.

I know a case that ran against a Metropolitan council a few years back. It ended up running for years, and racked up millions in legal fees. Eventually, the council lost the case, and was ordered to pay costs...

Needless to say, the residents of that council district STILL have a levy in their council rates to make up for the fees paid by the council for losing.

my parents built a house in a develpoment a couple of years ago, and for some f**king stupid reason there was a traffic island built right across the driveway. and the house was on the right side of the road and the end of the street was a dead end, so you either had to drive over the island or go to the end of the street and do a 10 point turn (due to lack of parking everyone parks ther cars in the street)

told the developers, they came and shortened the island, so now you can get in, but only just. easier to just drive on the wrong side of the road

  • 4 weeks later...

just checking gee wizz just a question! i know a girl who stepped in a pot hole on a foot path and broke her ankle and got 12 grand from the council for there poorly maintained foot path. but you cant get anything for damage to your car for a poorly maintained road?

And for those of you saying i should be sued for daqmage to their driveway and that i should learn how to drive, im not an idiot i mount it on an angle.

why is the legal height 100mm? is it to protect the roads, speed bumps and driveways? or is it to prevent damage to your car?

if vic roads build roads and streets and have a rule of 100mm and i stick to that rule and their road damages my car i should get compensated.

im not saying i will and i know ive got no hope getting it. but i thought fellow car enthusiasts would agree. makes sense to me.

obviously im careful not to damage my car but hey shit happens and when it does its because of crappy roads streets and driveways.

just checking gee wizz just a question! i know a girl who stepped in a pot hole on a foot path and broke her ankle and got 12 grand from the council for there poorly maintained foot path.

Thats a whole nuther kettle of fish.

The 100mm rule would be in effect, to prevent you from bottoming out over every dip and bump in the road. Bottoming out can be dangerous, as in extreme circumstances it could cause one or more tyres to lose contact with the road, hense the potential to lose control. 100mm would be the figure decided on, that would prevent you from bottoming out on anything other than the most extreme conditions.

By the way, I have seen plenty of stock cars scrape on some driveways.

Edited by Thunderbolt

Ok lets angle this question from another angle...as we all know to repair a cracked front bar is relatively cheap.

eg

John smith driving down the road in his r34 vspec II and hits a pot hole damaging one of 4000 dollar rims!

What do you think would be the outcome under these circumstances?

From a legal point of view, the council are pretty well sewn-up. That's not to say that they're above the law, but you would need a tightly strung case to get them to concede anything.

I know a case that ran against a Metropolitan council a few years back. It ended up running for years, and racked up millions in legal fees. Eventually, the council lost the case, and was ordered to pay costs...

Needless to say, the residents of that council district STILL have a levy in their council rates to make up for the fees paid by the council for losing.

This brings forward the question, is the counsil hated by its residents for continuing to persuse the case. Or is the resident that sued hated by all for the higher rates ;)

hey guys got a question for yas.

if your car is stock height and you drive into a driveway and scrap the shit out of your front bar can you sue the council for the damage? or even if you arnt stock height but are still at the legal height of 100mm? :P

Surely this thread is a joke.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I'm hoping I just don't have to do an engine rebuild NOW. Doesn't mean I won't do it at some point. I think a plus point is that the car presumably ran on or close to stock power nearly all it's life so far. Only the Owner I bought it from actually increased power with a standalone ECU and blew the OEM turbos. And after it got thee 2860s it wasn't driven an awful lot either.   That is what I meant. With the twins coming on so late (4500-5000rpm) I hope the rods won't want to exit the block prematurely. And it still being a 26 means the torque curve isn't gonna hike up all that much.   It didn't blow up on the dyno when they tuned it to 500ish crank. So I suppose it'll be okay for now. They did put a Tomei head gasket on first though which did not seal at all, and they redid it with a Cometic one. Which I hope won't be my water leak.   Mainly anything oil. So far all it has is the N1 pump, oil restrictor and a filter relocation kit with a cooler.
    • 15000? ish? Something like that anyway. It wasn;t so much a wear as a tear that then spread. Might have lasted a lot longer if not bothered by just one incident, whatever it was. I took a punt. They are really comfortable and do a good job of holding. My daughter HATED it when I first put them in, and probably still does now. She has sensory issues and hates the way they are all up your business. I'm 197cm and 95kg. Not fat or particularly wide, and the XL size seat is the rigth fit. If I was any fatter it would start to get too snug. Any skinnier and you'd possibly want the smaller width.
    • Mrs rs focus came factory with recaro cs  sportsters in it and they a pain in the ass to get in and out of with the really high bolsters, once you were in them they were one of the most comfortable seats I have ever sat in
    • The NA 2.5 has very little torque. You won't feel much. Those trannies are also a million years old now and it could well be f**ked. First generation electronically controlled autos will often refuse to kick down, ete, etc, depending on what's wrong with them.
    • Yes, but no but yes but no. Those "it's fine up to 500HP" rules and everything else like it were all determined back when the cars were 10 years old. As they are now 30 years old.....what do you reckon the chances of something shitting the bed are? I'd say they are much higher now than they used to be. You might be lucky. You might be unlucky. Spin the wheel and find out. Yeah, nah. It's actually exactly the opposite. Making boost early and having heaps of torque able to be generated right in the middle of the rev range will do more to damage an engine than having to rev it high to make the power. Think about the load on the conrods, bearings, etc, to make 400HP at 4000 rpm, vs 400 HP at 6500 rpm. So someone has already "let the Nissan out" which is how we describe the increased chance of a fiddled with engine to have had something done wrongly. Many more engines that have been opened die than stock ones do - even if you into consideration how they are treated wrt power levels and the like. Again, not saying that yours will definitely have been put back together by a moron. But the possibility does exist. It's still a lottery. Spin the wheel. What weakspots?
×
×
  • Create New...