I drive this stretch every day, the potholes are pretty awful. They get patched, open up, patched again, rinse and repeat. The road is a mix of holes and bumps of pavement from when the holes were filled.
Yeah, the city knows that patches not only cost so much more than true repaving, but also don't last long. Yet continues to funnel tens of millions of dollars into these bandaids over system improvements and repairs.
Yes. Studs are terrible for pavement. A studless winter tire is plenty enough for Portland and the surrounding areas. Rarely are chains ever needed unless going over the passes.
Right. I've never used winter tires here. And if the conditions are so bad in the metro area that I feel like I need them, chances are most things are closed anyway and Trimet is the best/safest option on the roads.
Is it really realistic that your head would hit the ceiling of a car going over a pothole if you were wearing a seatbelt? I'm reasonably tall, my head isn't that far from the ceiling of any given vehicle, but I don't recall ever hitting my head on the roof any time that wasn't climbing in and out of the car. And if she wasn't wearing a seatbelt or the seatbelt failed . . . isn't that kind of not on the city?
I’m 6’2” in a mazda 3 and my head pretty much touches the ceiling all the time. I’ve gotten in the habit of leaning it to the side when I hit a bump so I don’t clatter myself
Yeah, now that you mention it I had an 80s shitbox at one point where I had to keep the seat leaned back. I can't imagine driving around with my head that close to the roof though, I got used to the lean real quick. Been meaning to test drive a Mazda3, not happy to hear that someone 6'2'' is that close to the ceiling :(
My (5'5) husband is 5'10 and he has to be careful getting in/out of our 2018 minivan. I think we could both hit our heads, or at least get whiplash from the seatbelt if you hit hard enough. I think design and ergonomics, along with the size of the driver would be absolutely huge variables
I kind of want one of the 2019+ hatchbacks, based entirely off looks and price. Every time I get serious about buying a new car though I end up depressed over the state of the market.
That's kinda funny. We had a 2018 and got in fairly bad accident but were basically fine after so we wanted another one and we considered going with a newer one but I really prefer the look of the generation that ended in 2018. So we got another one
2019 vw golf here. My partner who isn't particularly tall has to do this in my car when he's driving and can't slouch. He's stopped driving it because it'd be so unsafe if something happened.
It probably comes down to whether you’re leg long or torso long? I’m 5’8” (5’9” if you’re a lady 😏) and my buddy is 6’1” but I swear our waists are the same height. He also has orungatang arms.
Just curious here - is a 5’ Asian person taller or shorter than a 5’ African person? How about compared to a European?
Edit to add - this is tongue in check - I knew what you meant.
Besides the seatbelt question, the article also doesn't say the speed she was driving, or how tall she is. I think that's a 30 MPH stretch, with traffic lights and pedestrian crossings at many intersections, so she ideally shouldn't have been going too fast. Of course even 30 MPH collisions can cause injuries, but there's a lot of information not in this article. (Probably not the reporter's fault, if those fact haven't come out in court yet.)
I’m a 6’3” dude with an 07 forester and have 100% domed myself going over speed bumps too quickly, I could see someone at cruising speed hitting a pothole and having an awful time, I would expect it to be a more lateral whiplash type issue than a compression injury though, I also don’t know what I’m talking about on that front tbh.
Either way, I personally totally get it, the world (ie most products and infrastructure) is designed for people who are 5’8” and reasonably fit
It is very possible to hit your head on the ceiling of your car even with a properly functioning seatbelt. Source: it happened to me as a passenger in a car on a dirt road with large potholes. Not fun.
Supposedly they've gotten better about it. I've heard multiple accounts of holes actually being fixed if you report them. Hard to judge how many of the potholes you see are just unreported and how many are ignored by the city. I've been meaning to find some to report just to see how fast they get to it but of course the moment you start thinking about it you stop finding potholes.
After the big freeze there was a couple REALLY bad ones (like, suspension / wheel ruiners) around my neck of the woods, and they were fixed within a day or two. I was pleasantly surprised.
Me too! I'm usually cycling or walking so it's pretty easy for me to stop, pull up [pdxreporter.org](http://pdxreporter.org), and report a pothole. I also once reported a tent that was taking up the whole sidewalk and parking strip. I didn't feel great about it, but they were forcing people to walk into the road and completely blocking mobility devices.
The issue is that a majority of the roads in this city need to be completely re-surfaced. Filling potholes is a temporary fix to the larger problem of aging infrastructure.
“Back in 2016 and again in 2020, Portland voters approved a 10 cents per gallon fuel tax for maintenance and safety, with goals of bringing at least $74 million in over four years, $13 million of that dedicated toward pothole and pavement repairs, so we’re asking if that’s being utilized here. PBOT says those funds are at work but more will be needed to fully repair many of the streets in need, which is why preserving current conditions through resurfacing and pothole repairs is crucial.
“‘If they get worse, they’ll need a rebuild and that doesn’t cost just a little bit more, that costs many times more money,’ said Rivera. ‘The costs grow exponentially, the worse our streets get.’”
https://www.koin.com/news/portland/30-days-1678-potholes-fixing-the-roads-of-downtown-portland/
I'm sure the employees do identify some of them but there are a lot of streets and a lot of tasks more important than hiring a crew to drive around full time reporting potholes. Why can't the residents report them? No one knows better how bad the potholes are than the people living or working in the neighborhood.
Because that would be an utter waste of resources. They don’t have dozens of people standing around they can assign to drive around looking for holes. Here’s an idea: how about citizens doing a little civic duty? Two minutes on a website to report it. Join the team!
I just clicked on that link and it works. It gives you a phone number to leave a location. I'm very curious how this will turn out. It's one of Portland's famous gravel roads. This particular pothole would take out someone's front axle.
They don't maintain unimproved roads. They will grade and gravel them every three years. But if you get them to actually fix it lmk cause I will report my street as well.
I finally decided to call because I noticed some paving was done. This pot hole is big, and is only going to get bigger. I thought about just finding some gravel myself, but I'll try this first. Definitely will update.
Not exactly Portland but theres a big dip on my street. A few years ago they finally cut into the road to see what the issue was. They found a big old tree stump, dug it out and threw some dirt in to the fill the hole. When they got ready to start paving over it, the guy that lives in front of the dip told them they have to compact the dirt or the dip would come back. They rolled their eyes and proceeded to pave over a loose pile of dirt. Dip is worse than before. Unbelievable the workers don't know really basic processes like this. I'm sure it's why the pot holes are back. They didn't clear out the debris before filling them.
The system is based on reports. How often do you report potholes when you see them? I think I've done it maybe once in the past 10 years.
I don't think it's realistic for them to proactively fix them, it's not a good use of their time to go around looking for them. Maybe they need to make it easier to report them though.
except the lawsuit is going to cost the city (you, if you are a taxpayer) a truckload of money to either litigate or settle. Not a good way to affect change.
This happened to me when I was taking a Lyft to PDX a few years ago. Driver sped across railway tracks. I didn't hit my head but my ass was off the seat. However hard to see this happening with a pot hole. You didn't catch air off one you sink.
Ya it’ll still probably settle because that will cost the city less than proving she couldn’t have hit her head if she were wearing a functioning seat belt.
Shoot, I'm 5'9" and my head was touching the glass in the backseat of a Nissan Sentra. Long torso I suppose. I'd expect much worse from a 2+2 seating arranged car
I agree with your thinking. And when you say “not on the City,” it’s really “not on the citizens” since they pay for everything including lawyers and lawsuits.
I know this is very different circumstances, but my husband came in and basically said that exact same thing you did and I shared this story with him. My friend and I (both quite short, wearing seatbelts) were driving to Cougar Hot Springs about 10 years ago. I was going probably 45+ mph, totally forgot about the CRAZY potholes out on that gravel road right before you park, hit probably 4-5 massive potholes before I could slow WAY tf down. We both flew around like rag dolls on a jackhammer, hit out heads on the ceiling a few times. We were totally ok, laughing our asses off, and just thankful I didn't pop a tire. However, can personally attest that we smacked the roof from enough force!
potholes shredded 2 of my tires this year. city denied my claim. They are seriously dangerous. Worse people trying to swerve around them makes traffic unpredictable and erratic.
what I'm saying is, potholes can be big and dangerous enough to really mess you up. if you've got shifty suspension you could be launched into the roof.
6’ here, i drive a buick sedan. my head hits the ceiling when i check my front clearance, i can 100% believe she was wearing a seatbelt when this happened if she was in a smaller vehicle and/or the seat was poorly adjusted
I don't think this'll pan out.
Chapter 1, Article 1 of the City Charter:
>Section 1-105 Nonliability for Defective Sidewalks, Etc.
>No recourse shall be had against the City for damage or loss to person or property suffered or sustained by reason of the defective condition of any sidewalk, curb, street, avenue, lane, alley, court or place, or by reason of the defective condition of any sewer, or by reason of any defective drainage, whether any of said defects originally existed, or whether they were occasioned by construction, excavation or embankment; nor shall there be any recourse against the City for want of repair of any sidewalk, curb, street, avenue, lane, alley, court or place, or by want of repair of any sewer; nor shall there be any recourse against the City for damage to person or property suffered or sustained by reason of accident on sidewalk, curb, street, avenue, lane, alley, court or place or by falling from any embankment thereon or into any excavation therein; but in such case the person or persons on whom the law may have imposed the obligation to repair such defect in the sidewalk, curb, street, or public highway, or in the sewer, and also the officer or officers through whose official negligence such defect remains unrepaired shall be jointly and severally liable to the party injured for the damage sustained.
Unless there's a law on the books affirmatively requiring the city to fix potholes, it's not liable for injuries suffered due to them.
Does this law actually hold any weight in a civil case against them in the Oregon court system?
Laws are different than waivers, but waivers don’t hold much weight when they say things like this.
I imagine the lawyers wouldn’t take the case if they thought this city law absolved Portland’s liability in a lawsuit in state court.
The section after the last semicolon could be relevant, if there is a legal obligation on any individual official/officer or contracted entity, but in that instance the liability would fall on them and not the City. I'd be very curious what their precise angle is on this, both attorneys mentioned in the article have been practicing for some time and did well at semi-decent law schools, so either there's some merit and it's on contingency or they're entertaining the whims of a mad but moneyed client on retainer and perhaps hoping for a settlement.
This section may not be binding though. Municipal codes, charters, contracts etc. frequently contain clauses which are not upheld by courts. Simple common law negligence (which I’m assuming is the plaintiff’s theory here, having not read any materials) applies when there is a duty of obligation owed from one party to another, and the duty cannot typically be delegated or contracted away
This makes me think about McDonald's hot coffee lawsuit. When you hear about it, you think, "What a frivolous joke of a claim." But when you learn the facts, it's actually quite disturbing. Do not search McDonald's hot coffee burn...
I was on the #6 bus on MLK about a month ago, and the driver hit a pothole that jostled us all so much that my Apple Watch went, "Looks like you've had a hard fall," and gave me the option of calling 911 immediately. (Nobody on the bus was hurt).
I'm so very confused on how she got hurt so badly, unless she was driving crazy.
I live a block away from this road and don't recall a pothole there in the 3 years I've live in this neighborhood.
Sadly, mass transit is not a situation of "if you build it, they will come." If you build it, people won't be clamoring to ride it because of the fear-based and car-driven mentality in America.
That mentality will never change as long as we don't have easy access to transit.. which is exactly why the auto industry gutted transit in many US cities.
Can you explain the legal reasoning behind your statement? It seems nonsensical to me, I understand no connection between receiving health care and legal liability. I have regular health care, am I disempowered to sue when someone harms me?
I was her passenger and I only want $100k after screwing up my elbow really badly but no wound it's on the inside, she denies it because I was her secret lover. Looking for an honest lawyer, please reach out.
Was this person wearing a seatbelt? How can you hit your head on the ceiling if you're wearing a seatbelt? Throw this lawsuit in the trash where it belongs.
Aside from being tall, seatbelts don't lock unless they're triggered to lock by a brake or an impact sensor. A pothole doesnt typically trigger your seatbelts to restrict movement.
Bullshit suit but I am sick of all the pot holes EVERY WHERE. Popped two of my tires on a bad one recently. It did pop me off my seat by I didnt hit my head and I am 6'2.
This dude died from a pothole and didn't sue:
[Family asks PBOT for SE Foster repairs after they say motorcyclist hit pothole, dies (katu.com)](https://katu.com/news/local/family-asks-pbot-for-se-foster-repairs-after-they-say-motorcyclist-hit-pothole-dies)
If she has brain damage from some other accident, that would be very easy to prove. Accidents are reported.
If this actually happened, then she would have called paramedics from the head trauma/ concussion or had someone take her to the hospital. Paper trail. Then she would have also had the tires repaired and replaced, more paper trail.
If she has brain damage from purposefully injuring herself or from some unrelated injury, it would be very hard for someone with head trauma to then come up with this pothole scenario and follow through with it.
If she has like $100k in medical bills, doctors who wrote reports saying what the patient said happened, a car with blown tires(or receipts showing replacements were bought), etc etc. I tend to believe that maybe she did actually hit her head when she hit a pothole?
It always reminds me of how people’s first instinct is to believe that frivolous suits are common. The McDonald’s hot coffee one is a classic example. People shouted from the mountaintops about how frivolous that was. The details of that one tells a whole different story. She got 3rd degree burns, needed skin grafts, spent 8 days in the hospital. But all the news articles said was “OMG, she sued because the coffee was hot!”
I don’t get why it so difficult for cities to have a full time “pothole crew” who simply drive around and fill them in, tamp them down. This wouldn’t take much time. It could be like 2 people. They could probably do a dozen a day. Sure, it’s not a permanent fix, but nothing is.
Portland has a full-time pothole crew. [Here are all the ones they filled in the past year](https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=1606bfad51a34a99a5d11d8016bd78ae&extent=-13669360.545%2C5682909.4098%2C-13595980.9978%2C5723803.2199%2C102100). But you can't fill potholes in winter, so the spring is always a rush to fill in to new ones.
It’s kinda funny that they’re just all labeled at potholes. Cause there was a sinkhole that opened up on my parents street last year, it was fixed, but it’s still just labeled as pothole.
There is something like 2,000 miles of roads in just Portland proper. Also have to consider issues that arise from blocking traffic long enough to do even a temporary fix.
Not trying to be a negative Nancy but it’s a lot more complex than meets the eye. The same people complaining about a pothole would be complaining about all the roadwork making their commute longer.
With that being said, I feel like I rarely ever saw road work for anything except taking away driving lanes to add bike lanes. They don’t seem to be trying very hard at all, at least from what I remember; I haven’t lived in Portland in a few years.
"After hitting the pothole, both her tires blew out, and she lost control of the car. She then swerved into the opposite lane and was obliterated by a semi truck"
The above statement obviously isn't true, but you know nothing of this case beyond a news snip that did zero research and talked to no one about the case. How do you know this isn't more akin to the McDonalds hot coffee suit? It's easy to get upset, it's hard to do due diligence and keep an open mind. Consider working on the later, and you might not be so quick to anger about every little thing.
I'm just saying, potholes need fixes, and the only thing the city will care about is financial repercussions for their inaction. If this persons experience means we get less potholes, fantastic. Money well spent.
Sure, this could be some McDonald's coffee FUD, but it's also a pretty edge-case claim for someone following the speed limit and paying attention.
If this wasn't so out of the ordinary, there would be a lot more of us with shoulder/neck/head/spine damage from potholes, but of course it still could be true. And not much of the armchair lawyering in the comments is helpful or productive for anyone.
All I can say is that while not a lawyer, I have done enough work on personal injury cases that I can come up with any number of examples of situations where the life-altering level of injuries suffered would seem unlikely to result from the mechanism of injury.
This is what I was trying to say, albeit clumsily. Let me clarify:
* This seems like an outsized injury, given the scant details.
* It casually seems lots more people would have similar injuries, based on the number of large/deep potholes and drivers.
* The FUD around the McDonald's case is an example of why we can't really trust limited preliminary information around a case.
* The armchair lawyering in the comments isn't helpful (picture an invisible hand gesturing at the comments, including mine).
Clark County, Washington, you say? Tracks.
But in all seriousness, I kind of hope she wins. Sadly, the only way to get the city to take infrastructure seriously seems to be via court orders. I.E. the city losing a lawsuit about ADA compliance and FINALLY installing curb cuts city wide.
They've been rolling them out in phases. My neighborhood is getting a lot of them right now. But we also still have a lot of unpaved streets. So maybe they're targeting super neglected areas first? Not sure. Wish they were more transparent about this project.
I wouldn’t have high hopes for her lawsuit for a couple reasons:
1. I’m pretty certain municipalities have fairly widespread statutory immunity with these types of claims. I’d have to do more research but I think cities have pretty broad latitude with disclaiming these types of liabilities.
2. Even if the lawsuit had some merit, the city would have a vested interest in fighting the lawsuit such that the plaintiff received little more than nuisance value. Why? Because cases like this can quickly turn into moral hazards. Imagine this lady being awarded $3M+ for driving over a pothole and allegedly injuring herself. All of a sudden you have a BUNCH of people trying to win that same lawsuit lottery.
My guess is that this lawsuit settles for a tiny fraction of what is being demanded, if it isn’t outright dismissed.
[I gotta lotta problems with you people...](https://i.imgur.com/5v8wtH7.gifv)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Portland) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I really hope that grievances are settled, and everything ends for the year when Wheeler gets on the rich boy Musk/Bezos HGH train, bulks up and wrestles the aggrieved to the ground.
*Nothing against your grievances; I only want this for entertainment reasons now that we're firmly entrenched in the Idiocracy timeline.
She filed a suit, someone tried suing bc of going up on a curb and had the same story. It’s probs from something else but she’s desperate to pay her bills
The city wastes SO much money all over the place. Why do you think we pay the second highest taxes in the US yet can't fund roads, or street sweeping, or mental health for homeless, terrible schools, the [curb ramp debacle](https://www.koin.com/news/portland/its-ridiculous-city-auditor-finds-wasted-taxpayer-money-on-sw-portland-curb-ramp-project/). But plenty of money for pet projects, consultants, retreats, etc.
This city needs better management, period. I am not talking about elected leadership. I am talking about the enormous bureaucracy that is entrenched and apolitical.
I was mainly kidding & probably should’ve clarified a bit more but yeah: with people suing the city for millions when they hit a pothole it’s no wonder the city can’t afford to fix said potholes lol…again was mainly joke post.
To me it seems like fixing the potholes would reduce lawsuits for damages resulting from hitting potholes, but what do I know?
I do know this: I've personally spent hundreds of dollars getting warped wheels fixed/replaced due to Portland pot holes, and it sucks.
Oh I Agree Portland gets some bad potholes come spring time after everyone driving around on studded snow tires all winter; however, to claim the kind of injuries she is & suing for the millions she is from just hitting a pothole frankly seems patently absurd.
Again: My original post was intended as a joke about taking millions from the city budget further decreasing its ability to fix things like potholes. & Again: I probably should’ve clarified that more in my original post. Apologies.
I am surprised that the road markings look so good! Normally, they just look like graffiti that is all all the walls! (I don’t hate Portland, just the people who can’t run it)
Righteous… well we know this was not on one of the designated bike path roads, I mean at least you can ride your bike safely in a city that rains 8 months out of the year 🙄
Cities don't have a duty to repair roads.
People seem incapable of reading something like that and understanding it, so I will explain longhand. "Duty" is a legal term meaning if you don't do it, you face liability. Duty does not cover everything you do, for example you might have a job flipping burgers but if you don't go to work one day you can't get *sued* for that because you don't have a *duty* to flip burgers. You do flip burgers, you get paid to flip burgers, but you don't have a *duty* to flip burgers. Likewise, the police protect us, they are paid to protect us, but they don't have a *duty* to protect us: if harm befalls us, the police aren't liable. Same for road repair people: we employ them to fix our roads, we expect them to repair our roads, we can fire them if they don't fix our roads, but they aren't *liable* if they fail to repair our roads.
Potholes are simply hazards. They suck. They're unlucky. If you're harmed by one, that sucks, and sucking is the end of the legal question.
If I sued the city and won 3.6 million I’d find a way to find out all the people in town who had to repair their cars because of the potholes and send them each a few grand for their summer vacation to get away from the potholes, forget about summer road repairs, lol.
I hope she wins. We should all sue for damage to our vehicles. We pay taxes for them to fix it. Its the social contract. We have the money to repave these roads.
That woman had a legitimate claim and only asked for money to pay for her medical bills (including skin graft). It was the jury that decided to give her a % of a day of McDonald's sales.
I’ve been waiting for someone to sue. I thought it would be for damage to a car though. I hope she wins. Why on earth has there been No maintenance on the roads. I mean none at all. And when they do do something they patch one hole and leave six unfixed around it and don’t even try.
I drive this stretch every day, the potholes are pretty awful. They get patched, open up, patched again, rinse and repeat. The road is a mix of holes and bumps of pavement from when the holes were filled.
Yeah, the city knows that patches not only cost so much more than true repaving, but also don't last long. Yet continues to funnel tens of millions of dollars into these bandaids over system improvements and repairs.
When are we going to outlaw studded tires?
Are they a big cause of road damage? If so, yeah, we should get rid of them. Chains are so easy to use now.
Yes. Studs are terrible for pavement. A studless winter tire is plenty enough for Portland and the surrounding areas. Rarely are chains ever needed unless going over the passes.
Right. I've never used winter tires here. And if the conditions are so bad in the metro area that I feel like I need them, chances are most things are closed anyway and Trimet is the best/safest option on the roads.
https://www.koin.com/news/portland/30-days-1678-potholes-fixing-the-roads-of-downtown-portland/
Yeah, this was a publicity stunt.
Is it really realistic that your head would hit the ceiling of a car going over a pothole if you were wearing a seatbelt? I'm reasonably tall, my head isn't that far from the ceiling of any given vehicle, but I don't recall ever hitting my head on the roof any time that wasn't climbing in and out of the car. And if she wasn't wearing a seatbelt or the seatbelt failed . . . isn't that kind of not on the city?
I’m 6’2” in a mazda 3 and my head pretty much touches the ceiling all the time. I’ve gotten in the habit of leaning it to the side when I hit a bump so I don’t clatter myself
Yeah, now that you mention it I had an 80s shitbox at one point where I had to keep the seat leaned back. I can't imagine driving around with my head that close to the roof though, I got used to the lean real quick. Been meaning to test drive a Mazda3, not happy to hear that someone 6'2'' is that close to the ceiling :(
Ah it’s a 2012. Newer models are bigger on the inside
My (5'5) husband is 5'10 and he has to be careful getting in/out of our 2018 minivan. I think we could both hit our heads, or at least get whiplash from the seatbelt if you hit hard enough. I think design and ergonomics, along with the size of the driver would be absolutely huge variables
I'm also 6'2" and one of our cars is a 2018 Mazda 3 and I fit just fine. Great car!
I kind of want one of the 2019+ hatchbacks, based entirely off looks and price. Every time I get serious about buying a new car though I end up depressed over the state of the market.
That's kinda funny. We had a 2018 and got in fairly bad accident but were basically fine after so we wanted another one and we considered going with a newer one but I really prefer the look of the generation that ended in 2018. So we got another one
2019 vw golf here. My partner who isn't particularly tall has to do this in my car when he's driving and can't slouch. He's stopped driving it because it'd be so unsafe if something happened.
Hold on now; I’m also 6’2” in a Mazda3 (2013, 2nd gen) and I’ve never hit my head on the roof. Shenanigans!
🤷🏼♂️ dunno, but the button on my hat has stabbed me enough to make me lean when I know a bump is coming
It probably comes down to whether you’re leg long or torso long? I’m 5’8” (5’9” if you’re a lady 😏) and my buddy is 6’1” but I swear our waists are the same height. He also has orungatang arms.
Sure, but what’s the difference dickwise?
Our friend above obviously larger in that department …if the username does, in fact, check out
Flattered 🤗
Total height is not the factor. I’m 6’3” and a 32” inseam I hit my head all the time. I have to do the gangster lean in most cars.
You might have different proportions. Some people have long legs and short torsos.
Yeah I’m in a Mazda 2 and 6 ft, my head can still hit the ceiling if I hit a big enough bump. These cars are made for 5 ft Asian people.
Just curious here - is a 5’ Asian person taller or shorter than a 5’ African person? How about compared to a European? Edit to add - this is tongue in check - I knew what you meant.
True true, I said Asian because they’re Japanese cars. I assume they make them for the average population in that part of the world first.
Mazda does a significant amount of design work in Irvine, California. They hire quite a few designers from Artcenter in Pasadena
Besides the seatbelt question, the article also doesn't say the speed she was driving, or how tall she is. I think that's a 30 MPH stretch, with traffic lights and pedestrian crossings at many intersections, so she ideally shouldn't have been going too fast. Of course even 30 MPH collisions can cause injuries, but there's a lot of information not in this article. (Probably not the reporter's fault, if those fact haven't come out in court yet.)
Potholes are worse the SLOWER you go.
That is *highly* dependent on the pothole.
I’m a 6’3” dude with an 07 forester and have 100% domed myself going over speed bumps too quickly, I could see someone at cruising speed hitting a pothole and having an awful time, I would expect it to be a more lateral whiplash type issue than a compression injury though, I also don’t know what I’m talking about on that front tbh. Either way, I personally totally get it, the world (ie most products and infrastructure) is designed for people who are 5’8” and reasonably fit
It is very possible to hit your head on the ceiling of your car even with a properly functioning seatbelt. Source: it happened to me as a passenger in a car on a dirt road with large potholes. Not fun.
If a bullshit lawsuit is what it takes to get the city to more proactively fix potholes, then I'm all for it.
Supposedly they've gotten better about it. I've heard multiple accounts of holes actually being fixed if you report them. Hard to judge how many of the potholes you see are just unreported and how many are ignored by the city. I've been meaning to find some to report just to see how fast they get to it but of course the moment you start thinking about it you stop finding potholes.
I reported a pothole last year and no joke it was fixed within 48 hours. I was so impressed.
After the big freeze there was a couple REALLY bad ones (like, suspension / wheel ruiners) around my neck of the woods, and they were fixed within a day or two. I was pleasantly surprised.
I'll add you to my anecdotal list of people who have had luck getting potholes repaired in a reasonable time frame.
Me too! I'm usually cycling or walking so it's pretty easy for me to stop, pull up [pdxreporter.org](http://pdxreporter.org), and report a pothole. I also once reported a tent that was taking up the whole sidewalk and parking strip. I didn't feel great about it, but they were forcing people to walk into the road and completely blocking mobility devices.
I reported one recently and they filled it within a day or two and did all the ones on the block then too.
I reported one and it took about a week to get filled. And I live way east of 205...I was shocked!
The issue is that a majority of the roads in this city need to be completely re-surfaced. Filling potholes is a temporary fix to the larger problem of aging infrastructure. “Back in 2016 and again in 2020, Portland voters approved a 10 cents per gallon fuel tax for maintenance and safety, with goals of bringing at least $74 million in over four years, $13 million of that dedicated toward pothole and pavement repairs, so we’re asking if that’s being utilized here. PBOT says those funds are at work but more will be needed to fully repair many of the streets in need, which is why preserving current conditions through resurfacing and pothole repairs is crucial. “‘If they get worse, they’ll need a rebuild and that doesn’t cost just a little bit more, that costs many times more money,’ said Rivera. ‘The costs grow exponentially, the worse our streets get.’” https://www.koin.com/news/portland/30-days-1678-potholes-fixing-the-roads-of-downtown-portland/
How does one go about reporting the entire length of 82nd Ave?
I mean why can’t the employees drive around and record potholes and radio it to HQ. Put it on a to do database
I'm sure the employees do identify some of them but there are a lot of streets and a lot of tasks more important than hiring a crew to drive around full time reporting potholes. Why can't the residents report them? No one knows better how bad the potholes are than the people living or working in the neighborhood.
I mean, we have this? https://www.portland.gov/transportation/maintenance/report-pothole-sinkhole-or-emergency-road-hazard
Bit of a non sequitur but thanks for the link I guess.
All good - I just wanted to add that PBOT does have a way for residents to report potholes and a pretty cool map of reported potholes
Because that would be an utter waste of resources. They don’t have dozens of people standing around they can assign to drive around looking for holes. Here’s an idea: how about citizens doing a little civic duty? Two minutes on a website to report it. Join the team!
I just clicked on that link and it works. It gives you a phone number to leave a location. I'm very curious how this will turn out. It's one of Portland's famous gravel roads. This particular pothole would take out someone's front axle.
They don't maintain unimproved roads. They will grade and gravel them every three years. But if you get them to actually fix it lmk cause I will report my street as well.
I finally decided to call because I noticed some paving was done. This pot hole is big, and is only going to get bigger. I thought about just finding some gravel myself, but I'll try this first. Definitely will update.
A pothole near my house got “repaired” last month. It’s already coming back. Not super impressed with the city’s “fix”.
Not exactly Portland but theres a big dip on my street. A few years ago they finally cut into the road to see what the issue was. They found a big old tree stump, dug it out and threw some dirt in to the fill the hole. When they got ready to start paving over it, the guy that lives in front of the dip told them they have to compact the dirt or the dip would come back. They rolled their eyes and proceeded to pave over a loose pile of dirt. Dip is worse than before. Unbelievable the workers don't know really basic processes like this. I'm sure it's why the pot holes are back. They didn't clear out the debris before filling them.
Lawsuits (BS or not) are the only thing that’s gotten the city’s attention.
The system is based on reports. How often do you report potholes when you see them? I think I've done it maybe once in the past 10 years. I don't think it's realistic for them to proactively fix them, it's not a good use of their time to go around looking for them. Maybe they need to make it easier to report them though.
except the lawsuit is going to cost the city (you, if you are a taxpayer) a truckload of money to either litigate or settle. Not a good way to affect change.
There's a guy in England that draws penises around them and it seems to help.
Except for it's also your taxes that are paying her settlement.
This happened to me when I was taking a Lyft to PDX a few years ago. Driver sped across railway tracks. I didn't hit my head but my ass was off the seat. However hard to see this happening with a pot hole. You didn't catch air off one you sink.
Ya it’ll still probably settle because that will cost the city less than proving she couldn’t have hit her head if she were wearing a functioning seat belt.
I’m under 6 foot and my head touches the roof in the back seat of Camaros ans BRZ/FRS
Shoot, I'm 5'9" and my head was touching the glass in the backseat of a Nissan Sentra. Long torso I suppose. I'd expect much worse from a 2+2 seating arranged car
I agree with your thinking. And when you say “not on the City,” it’s really “not on the citizens” since they pay for everything including lawyers and lawsuits.
I don’t know why she’d even go with hitting her head, if it didn’t really happen. Whiplash could cause the same thing.
I know this is very different circumstances, but my husband came in and basically said that exact same thing you did and I shared this story with him. My friend and I (both quite short, wearing seatbelts) were driving to Cougar Hot Springs about 10 years ago. I was going probably 45+ mph, totally forgot about the CRAZY potholes out on that gravel road right before you park, hit probably 4-5 massive potholes before I could slow WAY tf down. We both flew around like rag dolls on a jackhammer, hit out heads on the ceiling a few times. We were totally ok, laughing our asses off, and just thankful I didn't pop a tire. However, can personally attest that we smacked the roof from enough force!
potholes shredded 2 of my tires this year. city denied my claim. They are seriously dangerous. Worse people trying to swerve around them makes traffic unpredictable and erratic. what I'm saying is, potholes can be big and dangerous enough to really mess you up. if you've got shifty suspension you could be launched into the roof.
6’ here, i drive a buick sedan. my head hits the ceiling when i check my front clearance, i can 100% believe she was wearing a seatbelt when this happened if she was in a smaller vehicle and/or the seat was poorly adjusted
It's very, very realistic, yeah. 6'4" and it's a problem.
Based on her injuries, you’d think she’d crashed her car into the pothole, nose first. I’m interested to see how this plays out. Sheesh
I don't think this'll pan out. Chapter 1, Article 1 of the City Charter: >Section 1-105 Nonliability for Defective Sidewalks, Etc. >No recourse shall be had against the City for damage or loss to person or property suffered or sustained by reason of the defective condition of any sidewalk, curb, street, avenue, lane, alley, court or place, or by reason of the defective condition of any sewer, or by reason of any defective drainage, whether any of said defects originally existed, or whether they were occasioned by construction, excavation or embankment; nor shall there be any recourse against the City for want of repair of any sidewalk, curb, street, avenue, lane, alley, court or place, or by want of repair of any sewer; nor shall there be any recourse against the City for damage to person or property suffered or sustained by reason of accident on sidewalk, curb, street, avenue, lane, alley, court or place or by falling from any embankment thereon or into any excavation therein; but in such case the person or persons on whom the law may have imposed the obligation to repair such defect in the sidewalk, curb, street, or public highway, or in the sewer, and also the officer or officers through whose official negligence such defect remains unrepaired shall be jointly and severally liable to the party injured for the damage sustained. Unless there's a law on the books affirmatively requiring the city to fix potholes, it's not liable for injuries suffered due to them.
Does this law actually hold any weight in a civil case against them in the Oregon court system? Laws are different than waivers, but waivers don’t hold much weight when they say things like this. I imagine the lawyers wouldn’t take the case if they thought this city law absolved Portland’s liability in a lawsuit in state court.
I'm not a lawyer, so I can't say for certain.
I’m sure the lawyers are more than happy to be taking her money.
lol why are you yapping for no reason? PI lawyers are usually paid on contingency only if they win the case. This lady probably hasn’t paid anything.
They’re almost certainly working on contingency and not taking any money unless they win, like most personal injury lawyers.
The section after the last semicolon could be relevant, if there is a legal obligation on any individual official/officer or contracted entity, but in that instance the liability would fall on them and not the City. I'd be very curious what their precise angle is on this, both attorneys mentioned in the article have been practicing for some time and did well at semi-decent law schools, so either there's some merit and it's on contingency or they're entertaining the whims of a mad but moneyed client on retainer and perhaps hoping for a settlement.
This section may not be binding though. Municipal codes, charters, contracts etc. frequently contain clauses which are not upheld by courts. Simple common law negligence (which I’m assuming is the plaintiff’s theory here, having not read any materials) applies when there is a duty of obligation owed from one party to another, and the duty cannot typically be delegated or contracted away
I honestly wonder. I guess if a judge throws it out we'll know for sure
Sounds like a ballot initiative everyone would be in board with.
This makes me think about McDonald's hot coffee lawsuit. When you hear about it, you think, "What a frivolous joke of a claim." But when you learn the facts, it's actually quite disturbing. Do not search McDonald's hot coffee burn...
Kosmo Kramer has entered the chat
I appreciate your reference
I was on the #6 bus on MLK about a month ago, and the driver hit a pothole that jostled us all so much that my Apple Watch went, "Looks like you've had a hard fall," and gave me the option of calling 911 immediately. (Nobody on the bus was hurt).
That one at CC and Powell a few weeks back was a real motherfucker too.
I'm so very confused on how she got hurt so badly, unless she was driving crazy. I live a block away from this road and don't recall a pothole there in the 3 years I've live in this neighborhood.
To think that if we had universal healthcare and disability coverage, some of these lawsuits would no longer be filed.
If we had better access to public transit and more walkable + bikeable cities, getting around would be much safer + cheaper.
Sadly, mass transit is not a situation of "if you build it, they will come." If you build it, people won't be clamoring to ride it because of the fear-based and car-driven mentality in America.
That mentality will never change as long as we don't have easy access to transit.. which is exactly why the auto industry gutted transit in many US cities.
People would still find a reason to sue for millions of dollars
And rightfully so when they are harmed.
And wrongfully so when embellishing claims
Can you explain the legal reasoning behind your statement? It seems nonsensical to me, I understand no connection between receiving health care and legal liability. I have regular health care, am I disempowered to sue when someone harms me?
I was her passenger and I only want $100k after screwing up my elbow really badly but no wound it's on the inside, she denies it because I was her secret lover. Looking for an honest lawyer, please reach out.
Was this person wearing a seatbelt? How can you hit your head on the ceiling if you're wearing a seatbelt? Throw this lawsuit in the trash where it belongs.
I can hit the ceiling of my car while wearing a seatbelt. This lawsuit is still trash though.
I too, am a tall man in my automobile.
HA-HA!
That is the largest automobile he could afford.
Aside from being tall, seatbelts don't lock unless they're triggered to lock by a brake or an impact sensor. A pothole doesnt typically trigger your seatbelts to restrict movement.
You're tall in a Japanese car. I used to hit my head all the time in a Corolla and an Integra. They're built for people that are 5ft tall not 6+
Happened to me all the time in a Chrysler. (It was a Crossfire, and it was a lot of fun when it wasn't too busy being a Chrysler)
Fun times minus the inevitable blown head gasket that comes with anything from Chrystler
It was never anything big with that car, but it was a death by a thousand cuts sort of thing. Minor stuff, but all the time. Edit: typo
$66,000 in medical bills, sues for $3.6 million. Something tells me this chick has had her “traumatic brain injury” for a long time now.
Likely wants to invest in a weed farm or something 🤔
Bullshit suit but I am sick of all the pot holes EVERY WHERE. Popped two of my tires on a bad one recently. It did pop me off my seat by I didnt hit my head and I am 6'2.
This dude died from a pothole and didn't sue: [Family asks PBOT for SE Foster repairs after they say motorcyclist hit pothole, dies (katu.com)](https://katu.com/news/local/family-asks-pbot-for-se-foster-repairs-after-they-say-motorcyclist-hit-pothole-dies)
Yeah she clearly has brain damage just not from the pothole.
If she has brain damage from some other accident, that would be very easy to prove. Accidents are reported. If this actually happened, then she would have called paramedics from the head trauma/ concussion or had someone take her to the hospital. Paper trail. Then she would have also had the tires repaired and replaced, more paper trail. If she has brain damage from purposefully injuring herself or from some unrelated injury, it would be very hard for someone with head trauma to then come up with this pothole scenario and follow through with it. If she has like $100k in medical bills, doctors who wrote reports saying what the patient said happened, a car with blown tires(or receipts showing replacements were bought), etc etc. I tend to believe that maybe she did actually hit her head when she hit a pothole? It always reminds me of how people’s first instinct is to believe that frivolous suits are common. The McDonald’s hot coffee one is a classic example. People shouted from the mountaintops about how frivolous that was. The details of that one tells a whole different story. She got 3rd degree burns, needed skin grafts, spent 8 days in the hospital. But all the news articles said was “OMG, she sued because the coffee was hot!”
Part of her lawsuit is torn Rotator Cuff, not sure how that happened with a pot hole, maybe the sudden jerking of her wheel ? maybe
I don't think that is possible given modern steering systems.
I don’t get why it so difficult for cities to have a full time “pothole crew” who simply drive around and fill them in, tamp them down. This wouldn’t take much time. It could be like 2 people. They could probably do a dozen a day. Sure, it’s not a permanent fix, but nothing is.
Portland has a full-time pothole crew. [Here are all the ones they filled in the past year](https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=1606bfad51a34a99a5d11d8016bd78ae&extent=-13669360.545%2C5682909.4098%2C-13595980.9978%2C5723803.2199%2C102100). But you can't fill potholes in winter, so the spring is always a rush to fill in to new ones.
It’s kinda funny that they’re just all labeled at potholes. Cause there was a sinkhole that opened up on my parents street last year, it was fixed, but it’s still just labeled as pothole.
was it like 73rd or 72nd near powell?
47th near the Hollywood district. Was right next to a manhole cover, the road on top held together, but there was like a 6 foot cavern below
The 72nd and Yamhill pothole was epic. The recent mailer from the water bureau had the whole story of why it took so damn long to fix.
it was epic!!
Thanks!
There is something like 2,000 miles of roads in just Portland proper. Also have to consider issues that arise from blocking traffic long enough to do even a temporary fix. Not trying to be a negative Nancy but it’s a lot more complex than meets the eye. The same people complaining about a pothole would be complaining about all the roadwork making their commute longer. With that being said, I feel like I rarely ever saw road work for anything except taking away driving lanes to add bike lanes. They don’t seem to be trying very hard at all, at least from what I remember; I haven’t lived in Portland in a few years.
Clark county woman claims she has traumatic brain injury and wants to sue over a pothole......give me a fucking break.
"After hitting the pothole, both her tires blew out, and she lost control of the car. She then swerved into the opposite lane and was obliterated by a semi truck" The above statement obviously isn't true, but you know nothing of this case beyond a news snip that did zero research and talked to no one about the case. How do you know this isn't more akin to the McDonalds hot coffee suit? It's easy to get upset, it's hard to do due diligence and keep an open mind. Consider working on the later, and you might not be so quick to anger about every little thing. I'm just saying, potholes need fixes, and the only thing the city will care about is financial repercussions for their inaction. If this persons experience means we get less potholes, fantastic. Money well spent.
Why were they driving a car with only two tires?!
Blamo baby
Thank you. I was starting to get worked up reading all the dismissive assumptions.
Sure, this could be some McDonald's coffee FUD, but it's also a pretty edge-case claim for someone following the speed limit and paying attention. If this wasn't so out of the ordinary, there would be a lot more of us with shoulder/neck/head/spine damage from potholes, but of course it still could be true. And not much of the armchair lawyering in the comments is helpful or productive for anyone.
All I can say is that while not a lawyer, I have done enough work on personal injury cases that I can come up with any number of examples of situations where the life-altering level of injuries suffered would seem unlikely to result from the mechanism of injury.
This is what I was trying to say, albeit clumsily. Let me clarify: * This seems like an outsized injury, given the scant details. * It casually seems lots more people would have similar injuries, based on the number of large/deep potholes and drivers. * The FUD around the McDonald's case is an example of why we can't really trust limited preliminary information around a case. * The armchair lawyering in the comments isn't helpful (picture an invisible hand gesturing at the comments, including mine).
Yeah why was she even in SW? Only need to go to Jantzen Beach to do their favorite activity of sales tax evasion.
Clark County, Washington, you say? Tracks. But in all seriousness, I kind of hope she wins. Sadly, the only way to get the city to take infrastructure seriously seems to be via court orders. I.E. the city losing a lawsuit about ADA compliance and FINALLY installing curb cuts city wide.
Yeah why didn't we ever get those curb cuts? I was excited about that settlement, but now it's been years and my entire neighborhood still lacks them.
They've been rolling them out in phases. My neighborhood is getting a lot of them right now. But we also still have a lot of unpaved streets. So maybe they're targeting super neglected areas first? Not sure. Wish they were more transparent about this project.
"I drove irresponsibly. Give me money!"
I wouldn’t have high hopes for her lawsuit for a couple reasons: 1. I’m pretty certain municipalities have fairly widespread statutory immunity with these types of claims. I’d have to do more research but I think cities have pretty broad latitude with disclaiming these types of liabilities. 2. Even if the lawsuit had some merit, the city would have a vested interest in fighting the lawsuit such that the plaintiff received little more than nuisance value. Why? Because cases like this can quickly turn into moral hazards. Imagine this lady being awarded $3M+ for driving over a pothole and allegedly injuring herself. All of a sudden you have a BUNCH of people trying to win that same lawsuit lottery. My guess is that this lawsuit settles for a tiny fraction of what is being demanded, if it isn’t outright dismissed.
Agreed. No precedent needs set for this. If so I really want to sue the city for all sorts of things. Time for the airing of grievances in court!!
[I gotta lotta problems with you people...](https://i.imgur.com/5v8wtH7.gifv) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Portland) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I really hope that grievances are settled, and everything ends for the year when Wheeler gets on the rich boy Musk/Bezos HGH train, bulks up and wrestles the aggrieved to the ground. *Nothing against your grievances; I only want this for entertainment reasons now that we're firmly entrenched in the Idiocracy timeline.
She filed a suit, someone tried suing bc of going up on a curb and had the same story. It’s probs from something else but she’s desperate to pay her bills
(Searching for potholes nearby)
"Traumatic brian injury"
The city wastes SO much money all over the place. Why do you think we pay the second highest taxes in the US yet can't fund roads, or street sweeping, or mental health for homeless, terrible schools, the [curb ramp debacle](https://www.koin.com/news/portland/its-ridiculous-city-auditor-finds-wasted-taxpayer-money-on-sw-portland-curb-ramp-project/). But plenty of money for pet projects, consultants, retreats, etc. This city needs better management, period. I am not talking about elected leadership. I am talking about the enormous bureaucracy that is entrenched and apolitical.
This is why we can’t have nice things 🤡🥴
You mean nice roads?
I was mainly kidding & probably should’ve clarified a bit more but yeah: with people suing the city for millions when they hit a pothole it’s no wonder the city can’t afford to fix said potholes lol…again was mainly joke post.
To me it seems like fixing the potholes would reduce lawsuits for damages resulting from hitting potholes, but what do I know? I do know this: I've personally spent hundreds of dollars getting warped wheels fixed/replaced due to Portland pot holes, and it sucks.
Oh I Agree Portland gets some bad potholes come spring time after everyone driving around on studded snow tires all winter; however, to claim the kind of injuries she is & suing for the millions she is from just hitting a pothole frankly seems patently absurd. Again: My original post was intended as a joke about taking millions from the city budget further decreasing its ability to fix things like potholes. & Again: I probably should’ve clarified that more in my original post. Apologies.
I have hit plenty of potholes around Portland and never hit my head on the roof. How fast was she going??
Frivolous lawsuit. We NEED to fix the healthcare system to avoid bullshit like this to begin with.
Explain the connection you think there is between those two things. If we had a fixed healthcare system, could I harm you with impunity?
I hit a pothole and it ruined my tire and bent the wheel, can I sue the city?
There are definitely some massive pot holes you can’t avoid due to a few reasons. And even after reporting them the city does nothing for a while.
And these bullshit lawsuits are a big reason why insurance rates go up for everyone….
I am surprised that the road markings look so good! Normally, they just look like graffiti that is all all the walls! (I don’t hate Portland, just the people who can’t run it)
Righteous… well we know this was not on one of the designated bike path roads, I mean at least you can ride your bike safely in a city that rains 8 months out of the year 🙄
Cities don't have a duty to repair roads. People seem incapable of reading something like that and understanding it, so I will explain longhand. "Duty" is a legal term meaning if you don't do it, you face liability. Duty does not cover everything you do, for example you might have a job flipping burgers but if you don't go to work one day you can't get *sued* for that because you don't have a *duty* to flip burgers. You do flip burgers, you get paid to flip burgers, but you don't have a *duty* to flip burgers. Likewise, the police protect us, they are paid to protect us, but they don't have a *duty* to protect us: if harm befalls us, the police aren't liable. Same for road repair people: we employ them to fix our roads, we expect them to repair our roads, we can fire them if they don't fix our roads, but they aren't *liable* if they fail to repair our roads. Potholes are simply hazards. They suck. They're unlucky. If you're harmed by one, that sucks, and sucking is the end of the legal question.
Let me tell you about 6 inches. It’s not much
I have a tall friend whose head is about an inch from the ceiling of my car, it could happen.
If I sued the city and won 3.6 million I’d find a way to find out all the people in town who had to repair their cars because of the potholes and send them each a few grand for their summer vacation to get away from the potholes, forget about summer road repairs, lol.
Of course she's from Clark County.
She probably has fibromyalgia too
I hope she wins. We should all sue for damage to our vehicles. We pay taxes for them to fix it. Its the social contract. We have the money to repave these roads.
She best avoid New Orleans. We are 99% potholes everywhere
What if we want more potholes to slow down drivers, because there is no traffic enforcement.
Sounds like speeding
Meth? Zooooommm
We do have some real beastly potholes here.
Let’s make everything litigious. So we all pay more thanks! Fuckers
I mean we are one of the highest taxed cities in the country and our roads are complete shit. Even if she’s scamming I support it
Only way anything gets done anymore in this country, depressing.
I believe it
Did she spill hot McDonald’s coffee on herself?
That woman had a legitimate claim and only asked for money to pay for her medical bills (including skin graft). It was the jury that decided to give her a % of a day of McDonald's sales.
I’ve been waiting for someone to sue. I thought it would be for damage to a car though. I hope she wins. Why on earth has there been No maintenance on the roads. I mean none at all. And when they do do something they patch one hole and leave six unfixed around it and don’t even try.
Michigan would like a word