Class Action city of Los Angeles dangerous Roadway conditions / Potholes result in

[Glen61]

My jurisdiction is: California

Class Action city of Los Angeles dangerous and unsafe roadway conditions / potholes result in damages to Auto.

I would like to know if there is;

1. A possibility of a class action lawsuit due to denial of reimbursement claims, due to an accident caused by a pothole and separation of street grounds.

2. Granted that a class action is performed, how many similar situations must there be to include in this class action?


3. Quoted by Office of the City Attorney: "The City of Los Angeles had no prior notice or knowledge of alleged condition as required by law.
a. Does this law exist and if so where is it located?
b. If this law exists clearly it reflects no responsibility for the City of Los Angeles.
c. The City of Los Angeles has knowledge of this pothole and unsafe grounds and it is still not fixed.

4. What if one has stumbled upon a pothole in their auto and because of the nature of this encounter receives damages to their auto. If one thinks wisely, he or she may call 311 to report this pothole.


Additional Comments: I drove into a pothole and unleveled street grounds in the City of Los Angeles on a main street. The pothole and unleveled street grounds caused damages to my auto. The damages are a popped tire, bent rim, and broken axel. I reported the pothole immediately followed by a claim, diligent paperwork and photos. One year went by, a week ago I received a letter stating: Quoted by Office of the City Attorney: "The City of Los Angeles had no prior notice or knowledge of alleged condition as required by law. Following this message is a warning which states:

***WARNING***
"Subject to certain exceptions,you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally delivered or deposited in the mail to file a court action alleging state causes of action must be filed is governed by federal statutes."

" You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you desire to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately."



I seek advice on this particular situation.
Thank you.

 

[Michael Wechsler]

This is an old one... since it's unanswered, I'll just say that I hope the poster was able to settle with the state of California for damages caused by the defect in the road that was not fixed as the result of alleged neglect. I don't think a class action would be warranted in this instance. There are many different variables with these cases and they are probably best settled individually, e.g. conditions on the road that existed on that exact day. For example, let's say that there was a sign or cones that stood there for two weeks. Conditions concerning the hole could change every day too, e.g. the pothole was small on day one and became larger on day 10 and even larger on day 30. I think this is why you'd rarely if ever see a class action be certified for such types of auto and motor vehicle damages concerning the state or city's neglect in fixing a pothole in the street.

 

[disagreeable]

The standard applied in OH, is whether the responsible agency fixed it in a timely manner after the first report. We still have a car in the family that the front spindle, bearing, rim, and tire were destroyed on as well as the fender dented upward.