Regulation: corporate law-breaking

By Richard North - May 18, 2026

It doesn’t hurt every now and again to step back from the bigger picture and look at some of the low-profile issues (from the media perspective) that still have a direct impact on the lives of many people.

One of those issues I raised just before the local elections, one in which I have a personal stake – potholes – in particular the problem with unadopted roads and the difficulty in organising repairs.

This, I thought, was largely a problem in Northern towns and cities but I was interested to see a report from yesterday (with pictures) of an unadopted road in St Leonards (down the road from Hastings) which has been likened to something out of a war zone or the “surface of the moon”.

The legal position is explained quite well in the article where the so-called “frontagers” are responsible for the repairs, with a comment from East Sussex County Council (the highway authority in the area) stating that “to adopt a private road in a poor state of repair would place an unacceptable burden on the taxpayer”.

This is fair comment as to adopt the estimated 4,000 miles of unadopted roads in England and then to bring them up to standard could cost over £7 billion, the whole sum being borne by hard-pressed local authorities.

In fact, that 4,000 figure might be a significant under-estimate. Data are not centrally tracked and the last comprehensive national survey, carried out by the then Ministry of Transport, dates back to 1972.

A downward trend in local authorities adopting roads on newer housing estates suggests the total number may actually be higher today. A recent survey carried out by the Home Builders Federation found that councils had adopted the roads on just 10 percent of new housing developments built over a three-year period.

Many of those roads (but by no means all) will start off in good condition but, without routine maintenance, they soon deteriorate and neglect multiplies the defects when frost or heavy rains exert their effects. This is more the case when, as so often happens, developers leave roads unfinished.

That this is an issue is illustrated by a recent Parliamentary briefing and although it relied on figures produced in 2016, it still estimated that it would cost £300 million to bring all unadopted roads up to adoption standard.

That ten-year-old figure seems to me grossly unrealistic when the costs of bringing an unmade road up to standard can now amount to £60 per square metre, and considerably more if there are drainage issues or kerbing is required.

As it stands, however, there are no proposals by central government to resolve an issue which affects a substantial number of people, in the context where “potholes” – although not in the same league of the Iran conflict – is still an issue of considerable public concern. There are a huge number of reports in local media and the issue bubbles under the surface.

For my part, living in a street which is unadopted, and one that has steadily deteriorated over the years, I took action into my own hands and, on 6 May was reporting on the delivery of a further 20-tonne load of recycled asphalt to add to the 25 tonnes already laid.

I am pleased to report that, after a fortnight of unremitting labour, the spreading levelling and grading is now complete (pictured above), and I was waiting for a spell of good weather to complete the final phase of adding a binder and chippings, followed by a final compaction to give a quality of finish very close to hot-rolled asphalt at one tenth the cost.

That, at any rate, was the plan, but all that has now been thrown into doubt by our local water and sewerage provider, Yorkshire Water. On Saturday just past, their contractors sneaked in at the dead of night to effect a repair to the water main, digging up part of my new-laid surfacing.

To add insult to injury, they then backfilled the excavation with loose soil from a nearby mound, and covered it with a sprinkling of my recycled asphalt, gouged out from an adjoining section of road, leaving deep potholes in their place.

Not only was the surface left uneven (my own version of or the “surface of the moon”), they also managed to contaminate a large area with excavated soil, rendering it no longer suitable for the addition of a petroleum-based binder.

This, however, is not the first time we have experienced the attentions of Yorkshire Water. In January last, their contractor dug up sections of the road to repair a sewer, playing the same trick again of backfilling with loose soil on a road that had been surfaced-dressed with bitumen and chippings. It was not to full MOT standard which, as residents we could not afford, but was sufficient for the light traffic using our quiet cul-de-sac until it had been ripped apart by the contractor.

With added damage done by the contractor’s heavy vehicle and plant, the road could not be left without the repair, hence my undertaking to do the work on behalf of the other residents.

When I had sought to complain about the mess to Yorkshire Water, they denied any responsibility, claiming it was a local authority matter – a claim which I now know to be untrue.

In any event, the justification given by the contractor on the ground, when challenged, was that our street was an “unmade road” and he therefore had no obligation to restore the original surface.

Not only was this wrong as so many levels, it turns out that it breaches multiple statutory obligations. In the first instance, there is the Water Industry Act 1991 (WIA 1991), and in particular Schedule 12 which requires the utility to prevent damage as far as is possible, combined with the general duty to act reasonably when exercising powers under Section 159.

Then there is Section 70 of the New Roads and Street Works Act (NRSWA) 1991 which dictates that any statutory undertaker executing street works must reinstate the street regardless of who maintains it.

Finally, works must comply with the Specification for the Reinstatement of Openings in Highways, a Statutory Code of Practice, where S. 2.1.1 specifies that, in streets not maintainable at public expense i.e., unadopted roads), the standard (“performance requirement”) should match that of the existing construction, as far as reasonably practicable.

In no way did Yorkshire Water (via its contractor) comply with these legal requirements which means we have a statutory undertaker running roughshod through the law.

Furthermore, this seems to be the standard mode of action, cutting corners on costs, to the detriment of its paying customers who then have to pick up the tab to repair the damage.

But the worst is yet to come. The attempted repair to the water main in my street was unsuccessful so Yorkshire Water are coming back to dig up a new spot in the road.

And, to add to my joy, I heard yesterday from a neighbour who had been told that they are also coming back on Wednesday to dig up the entire street in order to replace the sewer which runs down the centre, the previous “repair” also having been unsuccessful.

So far, despite multiple complaints to the company, I have been unable to secure a commitment to repair the damage already caused, and nor have they been willing to give a guarantee that they will obey the law and reinstate the road surface properly after any new excavations.

This, to me, though, seems to sum up modern Britain. The law is for little people, while the bloated corporates, milking their customer base with perpetual increases in their charges, believe themselves to be above the law – and act accordingly. Arrogantly, they fend off complaints with delays, obstruction, lies and corporate bullshit.

As I previously said, though, this is small beer when compared to the likes of the Iran conflict, and it can’t compete with the Labour leadership soap opera. But small things like this do matter and have a disproportionate effect on the people that are affected by them.

If my blogposts suddenly disappear after Wednesday, it may be a sign of just how much they matter to this writer.