Broken wall case costs claimant £3,500 (From Times Series)

Broken wall case costs claimant from West Hendon £3,500

11:07am Monday 8th February 2010 in Top Stories By Kevin Bradford

A MAN has been saddled with court costs after he was forced to abandon a case against a water company accused of damaging a front wall.

Martin Roach, from West Hendon, claims he could not continue to pursue Veolia Water for money to repair brick work he and Barnet Council claim was cracked following breaks in a water main beneath The Broadway.

The 56-year-old pushed the case for more than four years after he says he was encouraged to do so by council bosses who had inspected the road.

Surveys found the tarseal had sunk about two inches because of a break in the water pipes. The holes were made worse by heavy traffic which Mr Roach claims caused cracks to appear in his garden wall.

A letter to Mr Roach from a highways officer said the council's insurance team investigated and found the damage to the property “had been as a result of several breakages along the length of the Veolia Water water mains”.

The letter added: “The council will pursue Veolia Water for the full cost of the necessary repairs, and I trust you will do likewise.”

Mr Roach began proceedings through the small claims court against Veolia Water, former Three Valleys Water, as well as the council, which he claimed was responsible for the condition of the road.

The council's website states it is “responsible for maintaining the road network".

“We inspect all public highways on a routine basis at intervals appropriate for the class of road and arrange repairs to both footways and carriageways where defects are identified as dangerous or urgent.”

A judge fast-tracked the case which Mr Roach said escalated the costs meaning he was forced to pull out. Both Veolia Water and the council claimed for costs totalling £7,000, which were then halved on appeal.

“I feel it is a miscarriage of justice,” said Mr Roach, who has taken out a bank loan to pay the costs.

“I was disappointed I had to pull out but I couldn't see any other financial alternative.

“I believe the council has a statutory duty to repair the roads that cause damage to property. The council said I should push the case against the water company and then completely hypocritically chased me for costs.”

Veolia Water has continually denied the damage was caused by leaks in the water mains, despite the council's assessment.

It said two experts found the damage was not caused by the “conduct of either company” and in a statement added: “Mr Roach then decided to discontinue his claim, which automatically obliged him to make payment of both our costs.”

In its latest statement, the council said: “As damage to the wall was due to breakages in the water mains, Mr Roach was directed to Veolia Water.”

The council did not admit liability although entered into joint negotiations with Mr Roach and Veolia Water.

Officers advised the claimant they would pursue costs if he was unsuccessful and said: “The council is under a duty to do so in the best interests of its taxpayers.

“Mr Roach subsequently withdrew his claim and the council had no alternative but to claim and recover costs it had incurred in defending this matter.”