Hit exploded water main
 

A few weeks ago I was driving home on a main road around 11 at night. I just washed my car that day and noticed a puddle in the lane ahead. I moved over in to the next lane to avoid the puddle and hit a huge bump and pretty much launched off of it. I lost control of the car briefly but was able to correct it. Turns out a water main exploded and warped the street causing a giant speed bump essentially. The road was also flooded which made it hard to see. Long story short I called the police and filed a report.

There was no visual damage to the car, but at the speed I was traveling and the impact of the bump I'm worried something was damaged. I can tell the car needs an alignment and ever since then, at idle, there is an obnoxious drone inside the car (any ideas?).

I plan to file a claim and should be able to get the damages covered by the DOT for the state. Just wondering what everyone's thoughts were or if anyone dealt with a similar situation.

Does the state pay like that? In Minnesota I'm pretty sure everything falls under the 'aint responsible for road hazards' clause. In fact, if I complained I'd expect a ticket for driving too fast for the conditions. LOL.

states usually have immunity from that kind of stuff.

I had something similar (but not nearly as bad) happen to me last week on my way to work.

I had just washed my car a day or two before. As I was approaching a stop light, I saw a bunch of water running down the road (from a water-main break). Luckily there was nobody around me, so I figured it would be okay if I just went through it slowly. As soon as the light changes, I started to creep forward into the puddle.

Then, OUT OF NOWHERE a PT Cruiser came flying up from behind me in the other lane, and completely soaked my car in a tidal wave of dirty water! I was pissed! It ended up raining later that day, so my car got wet anyways, but still!

Can you smell any exhaust fumes in the cabin?

Not sure about DE but in most states you'll need to prove that the state/city was negligent in not maintaining the water lines or they failed to correct the problem/issue in a reasonable time after they were notified of the problem. Good luck getting the state/city to pay for your damages.

If you didn't have the drone before, your exhaust is probably damaged and possibly leaking.

Sucks man. I actually got covered by the city for a flat tire I got running over a pothole. They have a form you can fill out for cases like this. Doesn't hurt to try. You'll need proof that the roads caused the damage. I went back the next day to take pics of the area and the pothole and it was already filled in. That's unheard of, so I'm guessing a lot of people complained. It was filled with water so I didn't notice it was a hole. City paid for it and an alignment. And this is in San Diego.

It's hard to say what if anything was damaged (tho' exhaust is a reasonable guess). I'd have a shop you trust put it on the lift and investigate.

If something needs to be repaired, no harm in trying to get the state to cover it, but I wouldn't count on it...

However,if you file a claim with your insurance company, the state might cover the deductible if you fight for it.

Good luck!

From what I heard from the neighbors who lived around this particular area of the street where the water main broke, this was the second time this issue occurred. It was repaired a few months before I believe. I have never witnessed a broken water main that split the street in half, so I am willing to bet it wasn't repaired correctly the first time, but then again I'm not a civil engineer.

I am going to file my claim today and contact DELDOT (Delaware division of transportation) and see what they have to say. I'll keep this thread updated. Thanks for everyone's words.

The last car I bought before my Z was a cls63 amg and on my way from buying the car I was driving through Richmond Virginia on 95 I hit a massive pot hole that popped my tire and bent a rim. I was so furious I hadn't even put 50 miles on the car and already damaged it. I never even considered trying to get compensation. Wish I would have thought about it because the tire was 400$ and Mercedes doesn't fix rims you have to buy a new one so it was just shy of 2g! Bull****! And that wasn't including the tow bill!

um that's not really similiar since you can wash your car to prestine condition again? :ugh:

op- since you're questioning here, have your dealer or mechanic go over the bottom of the car and suspension bits for any breaks.

So I spoke to DelDot and their insurance adjustor is going to be in contact with me "shortly". I guess they have to gather the facts and determine liability. I sense a legal battle ensuing. I hope this is not what it comes down to. To be continued...

Have you figured out what if anything was damaged?

DelDOT may cover the deductible.

If the report goes to carfax as an accident, I'd also look into whether or not your insurance company or DelDOT will offer additional compensation for diminished value (i.e., technically, any accident, even this one, will reduce the value of your car if reported, and you can be compensated for that loss in value). Your argument for this is even stronger if DelDOT admits to at least partial fault.

The front chin spoiler is damaged, the alignment is off and as I mentioned in a previous post, there is a drone inside the car. Some have noted probably an exhaust leak.

The police report I was given is a certain type of report that is non reportable in terms of carfax etc. I don't know the exact terminology, but this is what I was told by state police. Also, I may settle directly with DelDot's insurer and not have to involve my insurance company. The body shop I am going to take it to also does not report claims.

regardless of who the other party is, i would involve my insurance company... i pay premiums every 6months for the car, better put my agent to good use to argue on my behalf.

Very true! I just thought it was coincidental that I also encountered a road with a water-main break (although my experience wasn't nearly as bad as the OP's).

Hopefully the OP can get this resolved.

What road was this on?

Also, I know a good independent dealer that takes care of me and my buddy's Zs. In New Castle.

Foulk Road heading North right before the Murphy/Wilson intersection.

I am probably going to take it to Cavallo on 202 in chadds ford but thanks for the suggestion. I don't think I've ever seen your car around..

Wow. I've used that road to get to work sometimes. Glad I didn't yesterday. I live off Grubb and work at DuPont on 141.

Place is called United Auto Sales. It's by the airport. They sell mainly Gs and Zs, so they're well familiar with the cars.

Oh ok. I am familiar with that place. I work about 10 min from there at JP Morgan in Newark. I visited them when I started my search for a Z.

I live about 5 minutes from Grubb road. On Saturday's I go up to Cars & Coffee in West Chester if youre ever interested in taking a cruise up. There is usually a good turn out when the weather is nice.

I'll have to check it out sometime.

So its been a while since I posted on this thread. since my last post I have reached out to the state of Delaware as well as the city of Wilmington where the incident occurred. I have been rejected by both parties based on a law that provides immunity to governmental entities in these types of cases. Seems absurd you can write in a law basically protecting you from suit, but nonetheless this is how our government works.

However, I did look in to the laws they cited and there is a relative law that states exceptions to this law of immunity. I feel my case (read above) falls within the exceptions in part 3. Below is the law and the exceptions to the law. Any lawyers on here feel free to chime in on your opinion of the strength of my case as it relates to the exceptions.

Immunity from suit Law:

(a) Except as otherwise expressly provided by statute, all governmental entities and their employees shall be immune from suit on any and all tort claims seeking recovery of damages. That a governmental entity has the power to sue or be sued, whether appearing in its charter or statutory enablement, shall not create or be interpreted as a waiver of the immunity granted in this subchapter.
(b) Notwithstanding § 4012 of this title, a governmental entity shall not be liable for any damage claim which results from:
(1) The undertaking or failure to undertake any legislative act, including, but not limited to, the adoption or failure to adopt any statute, charter, ordinance, order, regulation, resolution or resolve.
(2) The undertaking or failure to undertake any judicial or quasi-judicial act, including, but not limited to, granting, granting with conditions, refusal to grant or revocation of any license, permit, order or other administrative approval or denial.
(3) The performance or failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function or duty, whether or not the discretion be abused and whether or not the statute, charter, ordinance, order, resolution, regulation or resolve under which the discretionary function or duty is performed is valid or invalid.
(4) The decision not to provide communications, heat, light, water, electricity or solid or liquid waste collection, disposal or treatment services.
(5) The discharge, dispersal, release or escape of smoke, vapors, soot, fumes, acids, alkalines, toxic chemicals, liquids or gases, waste materials or other irritants, contaminants or pollutants into or upon land, the atmosphere or any watercourse or body of water, except as provided in subdivision (3) of § 4012 of this title.
(6) Any defect, lack of repair or lack of sufficient railing in any highway, townway, sidewalk, parking area, causeway, bridge, airport runway or taxiway, including appurtenances necessary for the control of such ways including but not limited to street signs, traffic lights and controls, parking meters and guardrails.
Paragraphs (1) to (6) of this subsection to which immunity applies are cited as examples and shall not be interpreted to limit the general immunity provided by this section.
(c) An employee may be personally liable for acts or omissions causing property damage, bodily injury or death in instances in which the governmental entity is immune under this section, but only for those acts which were not within the scope of employment or which were performed with wanton negligence or willful and malicious intent.

Exceptions to Immunity Law:

(3) In the sudden and accidental discharge, dispersal, release or escape of smoke, vapors, soot, fumes, acids, alkalines and toxic chemicals, liquids or gases, waste materials or other irritants, contaminants or pollutants into or upon land, the atmosphere or any watercourse or body of water. -

Crap like this is what insurance is for. $hit happens.

Good luck, bud. They've been working on that area lately, too.

I'm no lawyer but I read that as it has to be a hazmat spill/discharge and I don't think water would be classified as a hazmat. YMMV

yep

Exception #3 is not a pipe bursting onto streets, it is hazard waste going into rivers.

and sorry to hear about your car. Insurance should take care of it. It sucks but what do you do.......COLD BEER!!!!!

Either of you agree "the sudden discharge, release or dispersal of LIQUIDS (water) into or upon land (the street)" is relevant to my case? Just trying to get different opinions.

"... toxic chemicals, liquids or gases, ..." (my emphasis). Unless the water was contaminated, my guess is that you're SOL.

I suggest asking an actual lawyer instead of a bunch of legal bozos on the Intertubes.

Dude...you're State is run by a liberals and employs ilberals. What do you expect. ;)

:iagree:

Red states don't shield themselves from liability for things like this? :confused:

Florida doesn't even have decent streetlights or sidewalks. I'm sure if you fall into a sinkhole here, you're screwed... maybe Texas takes better care of it's citizens?

Wait - you hit an exploded water main, right? That means water was discharged onto land. Sounds like you have a legitimate case. Does it technically HAVE to be toxic? Note it says toxic chemicals then moves on -- it doesn't say "including".

Get a lawyer.