Linslade couple urge CBC to take action over ‘danger pavement’

Sandy Hillery was left in pain in December when she lost her footing on a path covered in moss and vegetation and broke her wrist.

Together with husband David, the couple claim the pavements have been left in a “sorry state” for many years, and fear that, if left unattended this autumn and winter, their elderly neighbours could suffer a similar fall, but with severe consequences.

David, 69, said: “Last December my wife was posting Christmas cards to neighbours in Lime Grove.

“While doing this she slipped on the pavement that was covered with moss, old broken down vegetation, twigs and other detritus. She was taken to Luton and Dunstable Hospital in an ambulance.

“The pavements in our road are in a sorry state, being uneven where tree roots have raised them. The surface has degraded and left holes, and there are areas where pipes from drains have subsided, and there are kerbs that are misplaced.

“These have been the subject of many complaints from a number of residents over the past few years.”

Sandy, 73, added: “I’m fed up. The council is shaking its hands and saying ‘it’s not our responsibility’.

“It’s set off arthritis in my hand and I feel it’s all because of their negligence. I used to be quite mobile until then.

“I just feel that they have a duty; otherwise what are we paying our taxes for?”

The couple told the LBO that after the incident the pavement was sprayed with insecticide and the moss was then cleared up.

However, Mr and Mrs Hillery claim that it was only after neighbours complained that a larger area of the moss was cleared.

While the council does carry out path inspections, the couple said they were confused by CBC’s responses to their complaints. They claim they were informed by CBC that it was not responsible for ‘Transient Hazards’ (to include leaves, moss, algae and similar substances) that may be present on the highway.

Mr and Mrs Hillery also allege that they were informed by CBC that no legal duty is owned by the council to abate or remove substances of this nature, and that it was ‘not a duty to ensure safe passage along the highway is unimpeded by obstructions on the surface of the highway’.

But the couple argued: “If the council is not responsible for the safe passageway of people along pavements due to obstructions, then who is?

“Furthermore, part of section 89 of the Environmental Protection Act which is law, and Defra’s code of practice on litter and refuse, says the council has a responsibility for detritus.

“And why does the council pay for teams to sweep leaves from a number of pavements if they are not responsible?”

A Central Bedfordshire Council spokeswoman said: “Under the Highways Act 1980 we have a duty to maintain the highway to a safe and serviceable standard. Regular safety inspections are carried out across Central Bedfordshire but defects may occur in between inspections, which is why we welcome reports from members of the public.

“The moss clearance process is not completed in one day.

“We initially came out to spray the moss and then had to wait for it to die back before scraping it off.

“When we came back to the site we identified some areas where the herbicide had not killed the moss and therefore reapplied it to the relevant areas.

“We then subsequently came back to complete the removal process.”