Just been on their web site (not had a chance to buy a copy yet) to put a link up but there’s nothing on there yet 
Roseanne, have a look at this report in the Times, and click on the link for How did your council perform. Look down the list for Tameside, I find it surprising.
Keep up the pressure
Heres the link for you,
i will thanks
i expect it is high they are all about image and cover up all their faults. thats why they hate me letting people know the truth
thanks
roseanne
Dratsabasti
can i read it online?
Callum’s story is on channel m tomorrow main news story. channel 39 around manchester or cable channel 26 they have been here for three hours tonight
thanks everyone
Roseanne
Sadly I live in West Yorkshire,but I wonder if it’s available online?
Ken.
mcn tend to lak the print stories onto the web a few days later to help maintain sales.
It should be on by sunday I’d guess.
I’ll see if anyone who bought it from a bike forum I use can scan it.
ta.
Heres the link to that Times story that I forgot to put on my earlier post.
Thanks i have looked at the times, it is no wonder when tameside are constantly covering up their faults and only care about “their image”.
today i had my demonstration and it went really well, in two hours i got over 500 signitures i actually ran out of petitions. people in tameside are really concerned about the roads and their opinion is the reason tameside will not admit liability is that they know it is manslaughter.
So two years today from callum’s accident my campaign begins and i know i have the support of many others. They have repaired a manhole cover which i have been monitoring since callum’s accident 400 yards from callum’s s accident spot one hour after receiving a complaint from the local paper, they are not yet aware the local paper measured it and took a photograph where the depth is over 75mm. Tameside’s reaction to the complaint was in aug 2005 the road was checked and any repairs were carried out, yet another one missed on the same stretch as the accident.
thank you all for your support it really helps
Roseanne
Chuffed to bits for your petition Roseanne, well done for your hard work.
I’m pleased that the Times article made good reading for you, depressing isn’t it.
Hi everyone
yes tameside are trying to get out of it being their fault again., by saying that the other manhole cover which was over 75mm deep and been there for over two years as nothing to do with them it belongs to the utilities and they checked that stretch in aug 2005 and carried out any repairs. United utilities are saying it is up to tameside to spot defects and repair the tarmac. it is no wonder the roads are in this condition when nobody knows who responsibility it is to inspect the roads and manholes.
would anybody please sign my online petition.
petitionthem.com/?sect=detail&pet=2399
I thought it was up to the local authorities to check the highways and report defects to the utilities etc does anybody know any different?
thank you
Roseanne
Duly done. 
Ken.
Callum’smum:
Hi everyone
yes tameside are trying to get out of it being their fault again., by saying that the other manhole cover which was over 75mm deep and been there for over two years as nothing to do with them it belongs to the utilities and they checked that stretch in aug 2005 and carried out any repairs. United utilities are saying it is up to tameside to spot defects and repair the tarmac. it is no wonder the roads are in this condition when nobody knows who responsibility it is to inspect the roads and manholes.would anybody please sign my online petition.
petitionthem.com/?sect=detail&pet=2399
I thought it was up to the local authorities to check the highways and report defects to the utilities etc does anybody know any different?
thank you
Roseanne
Hi again Roseanne.
The County Councils or Highways Authorities are responsible for the major routes, trunk roads, etc outside town boundaries. The Borough Councils are responsible within Borough boundaries, and in both cases that includes maintenance and repair. The first step is to establish ownership and responsibility, and as such any liability.
The Utilities (I work for one in the day job) are licensed under the New Road & Street Works act and must operate in highway within the HAUC specifications, which cover all aspects of excavation & re-enstatement in designated highway. A Utility has to submit opening notices to all relevant authorities informing of the work to be done, the timescale and protection measures (Signing, Lighting, Guarding, etc.) prior to starting and depending on the work these notices will be either 30 days and seven days, or just seven days. In emergencies these notices can be issued retrospectively,.
If a utility digs up the road or footpath they must re-enstate as per HAUC and then remain responsible for it for two years under a system of guarentees. The LA employ inspectors who are responsible for maintaining standards by the utilities.
This means that you need to establish the following:
Is it Queens Highway or private road?
If highway, who’s is it. County, Borough or Dept of Transport?
Did they do any work or just supervise?
If a Utility did the work, who was it (UU in this case)?
When was the work carried out and how long did it last (Dates, etc)?
When was the incident?
What happened?
Police, Highways, Borough and Utility should all have comprehensive record of the activity and its management, if you have a solicitor he could demand that info, if not then a case for neglect is perhaps one to consider.
Keep plugging away and no matter how much they mess about they cannot absolve their responsibilities.
Good luck.
Thanks CM
it is a class B road belonging to the borough council (Tameside)
On the 17th December 2003 straight after my son’s accident we were told tameside notified United utilities to repair the manhole cover and this was done within a few hours after the death of my son before the road was re-opened. although at the time this was denied we proved that the manhole and grid were repaired because somebody i know took photographs of tameside repairing the stretch of road, tameside have told us that they only repaired the rain gully and contractors of uu repaired the manhole cover.
we were told at the inquest that tameside inspected the road (Bayley Street) in August 2003 and there were no problem with the mahole. over 50 witnesses came forward to me and told me they would be witnesses in court stating that the manhole cover had been in that condition for about five years. i was also told this of many people at the demonstration on saturday.
To prove my point for the last two years i have kept an eye on a manhole cover 400 yards from callum’s accident spot which was also over 75mm deep (i felt awful about this because maybe i should have reported it sooner, but there are so many potholes in tameside and i wanted to prove their inspections were not good enough or not done at all)
Last week i notified the local press because i knew the inspection should have been carried out in Aug 2005 and was still in the same condition. The local press rang tameside and it was repaired within 24 hours. luckily the papers took photographs and measurements first. The local press rang tameside to ask them for comments and they were told it is not their responsibility because the manhole belongs to united utilities and when the press rang united utilities they were told it is tamesides responsiblity.
what i need to find out is who is responsible for checking for defects, i know tameside have three highway inspectors who i thought checked for all defects on the highways but are now being told it is not up to them because the grid does not belong to them.
i know i keep going on but i have so much prove that these manhole covers were 35 mm below the criteria for repairs and were in that condition for years so why is it not corporate manslaughter. even a counsellor who lives facing me said he had to avoid the manhole cover that callum hit because it through him all over the road.
Do the utilities have their own inspectors of highways or if the road belongs to the council is it the responsibility of the councils inspectors.
thank you very much
Roseanne
Roseanne…the utilities are responsible for their plant in the highway whether they own it or not, by this I mean if they are the operator of the asset whether it belongs to them or not THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE!
The utilities will have someone like a project manager or supervisor who will have responsibility to ensure their works are done, so if they dig up the road they must put it back to original condition and them guarentee that work for two years, if the work becomes defective within that two years the Council can force them to do it again under the guarentees, but it remains the Council Inspectors job to police the activity under the regulations of the New Roads & Street Works Act 1992, the enforcing Authority and street works co-ordinator is the Council.
Hope this helps.
CM
yes thank you, you have explained it very well, funny when i write CM we called called that “Callum Mark”
my solicitor said it was the council’s and a conservative mp emailed me today and said he was nearly 100% sure it was. That manhole had been in that condition for about five years so any guarantee would have run out along time ago.
one of the local papers tonight covered my demonstration and gave this quote:
"an investigation last week revealed another sunken manhole had sunken dangerously on the same stretch. Measures were taken by us (paper) and it was below the highway departments own 50mm trigger mark for repair. Tameside council insisted that an inspection had been carried out in Aug and no repairs at that spot were needed, but Roseanne claimed she had been monitoring it for two years and it had been missed, Engineers have since repaired the manhole in question
i have photographic evidence with a tape measure and sprit level including dates printed from the film developers on the back.
i know tameside told another paper the manhole had nothing to do with them.
i really hope now i have enough on them to take them to a civil court.
CM
Thank you
Roseanne
Just had a look at the signatures,and I notice mine hasn’t appeared. 
However,I did notice that a councillor has signed it.
Interesting.
Ken.
yes
a conservative counsillor who adviced me today that he is nearly 100% sure that tameside is responsible for checking the roads, tameside is labour and always has been. i am hoping that many more counsillors will sign now having seen his name on.
hope your name comes up soon
thank you
Roseanne
I read the MCN story and although the paper does annoy me at times, they seem to have got this bit right.
I will post the link to your petition on the Biker site I subscribe to. The more the merrier I reckon 
Thank you Malc because this is an issue that effects everybody on the road
i have still not found any organisations that focus on road conditions they are normally about speeding and drink driving maybe because proving the road condition is the cause of an accident/death is much harder to prove, especially when all the evidence is manipulated and defects are corrected at the scene of the accident. .
the link again
petitionthem.com/?sect=detail&pet=2399
Thank you
Roseanne
Callum’s mum