A Quarter of the Square Mile Needs Resurfacing
Britain's smallest highway network is also one of its busiest. The City of London Corporation earns GREEN for spend yet rates AMBER overall — because its own annual inspection data shows 18% of streets in Red priority in 2024, other funding streams hit £494k in 2024/25, and the Corporation admits at least a quarter of the network is in a category warranting resurfacing or renewal on the Square Mile's intensely trafficked streets.
The Smallest Network, The Heaviest Load
What makes City of London claims different from any other London borough
Highway authority — with exceptions
The City of London Corporation is the highway authority for all streets in the Square Mile except four TfL Red Routes, for which Transport for London is responsible. The Operations Department covers highway maintenance, drainage, resurfacing, street lighting and cleansing.
If your pothole was on a red route, your claim is against TfL — not the Corporation. For every other street in EC1–EC4, EC2, EC3 and EC4, the Corporation is the correct defendant.
DfT allocation vs actual spend
The Department for Transport allocated £70,000 in additional highway maintenance funding to the Corporation. Total highway spend in 2024/25 was £1.274m — resurfacing, reactive maintenance and other funding streams combined.
That gap between DfT allocation and Corporation spend underpins the GREEN spend scorecard — but it does not eliminate liability for individual defects that persisted between inspections.
"In recent years, a proverbial 'steady state' has been reached, whereby approximately a quarter of the City's network has been renewed (or is at least in its early years of lifespan). That said, at least a quarter of the network (on average) is in a category enabling it to be considered for resurfacing or renewal."
— City of London Corporation — Highway maintenance and operations transparency report (May 2026)
What The CVI Condition Data Shows
Five years of Coarse Visual Inspection ratings from the Corporation's own transparency report
| Priority rating | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 5-yr avg |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Red (5/6) | 24% | 21% | 19% | 18% | 18% | 21% |
| Dark Amber (4) | 13% | 13% | 11% | 9% | 10% | 11% |
| Light Amber (3) | 10% | 10% | 11% | 12% | 11% | 11% |
| Yellow (2) | 13% | 13% | 11% | 19% | 19% | 16% |
| Light Green (1) | 17% | 18% | 16% | 18% | 19% | 18% |
| Dark Green (0) | 23% | 25% | 31% | 25% | 24% | 27% |
Red priority — resurfacing within 12–24 months
The Corporation defines Red (5/6) streets as showing "many heavy signs of deterioration and resurfacing should be programmed within the next 12–24 months." At 18% in 2024, nearly one in five Square Mile streets sits in that category — down from 24% in 2020, but still a five-year average of 21%.
Dark Amber (4) adds another 10% in 2024 — streets where resurfacing should be considered within three to five years. Combined, roughly 28% of the network is in the two highest deterioration bands.
The Yellow category shift
Yellow (2) — streets showing "little or no signs of deterioration" — jumped from 11% in 2022 to 19% in both 2023 and 2024. Meanwhile Dark Green (0), recently resurfaced streets, fell from a peak of 31% in 2022 to 24% in 2024.
That pattern is consistent with a network ageing out of its post-resurfacing window — fewer freshly renewed streets, more sections drifting toward maintenance need. Figures are based on an internal Coarse Visual Inspection survey, carried out annually.
DfT condition scorecard — AMBER
DfT rates the Corporation AMBER on condition overall. The weakest score is on unclassified roads — the category where most Square Mile side streets sit. Your claim should reference the CVI priority band for your specific street, not borough-wide averages alone.
£1.274m Spent — Other Streams Quadrupled
Five years of highway maintenance spend from the Corporation's transparency report
| Financial year | Resurfacing | Reactive maintenance | Other funding streams | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025/26* | £601k | £80k | £193k | £874k |
| 2024/25 | £700k | £80k | £494k | £1.274m |
| 2023/24 | £720k | £80k | £122k | £922k |
| 2022/23 | £700k | £80k | £126k | £926k |
| 2021/22 | £580k | £150k | £101k | £761k |
GREEN spend — but reactive pressure rising
DfT gives the Corporation a GREEN Spend scorecard (capital spend index 91.6, preventative spend score 100.0). Resurfacing budgets run at £580k–£720k a year. But "other funding streams" — which the Corporation does not break down further in the published table — quadrupled from £122k to £494k between 2023/24 and 2024/25.
The Corporation notes capital project figures fluctuate each year with no set budget, depending on the volume of work undertaken. The 2025/26 total of £874k is year-to-date and "likely to increase with funding from other streams."
Make safes until resurfacing arrives
The Corporation states that when a section nears the end of its life cycle, either "make safes" are planned until programmed works take place (if already scheduled within 12 months) or planned works are accelerated forward. That admission matters: a pothole patched as a temporary make-safe is evidence the Corporation knew the carriageway was failing — not that it had been properly maintained.
Utility Works — Inevitable, Frequent, Life-Shortening
The Corporation's own explanation for why reactive maintenance dominates on Square Mile streets
"Third party interventions (such as utility works) are inevitable and frequent in the City, and this can demonstrably shorten or compromise the structural life cycle of the highway by a number of years. Only after this, does reactive maintenance then become more apparent or required when needed."
— City of London Corporation — Highway maintenance and operations transparency report (May 2026)
"The Highways and Streetworks teams work closely in order to attempt to minimise disruption to the network. Any long-term resurfacing or scheme work is always programmed to occur after any major or substantial third-party utility works."
— City of London Corporation — Highway maintenance and operations transparency report (May 2026)
What this admission means
The Square Mile has one of the densest concentrations of utility infrastructure in Britain. The Corporation formally acknowledges that excavations shorten highway life "by a number of years" — documented knowledge of accelerated deterioration on specific routes.
If your defect formed after streetworks on or near your road, ask whether the Corporation re-inspected the carriageway post-reinstatement and whether resurfacing was deferred.
Questions worth asking
- • Were there utility excavations on your street in the 12 months before your incident?
- • Was the carriageway reinstated to specification — or patched and left?
- • Did the Corporation accelerate resurfacing, or apply a make-safe and defer?
- • Was your defect on a section the CVI survey rated Red or Dark Amber?
2025/26 Resurfacing Programme
Thirteen planned sections — the Corporation's own forward programme for the current financial year
- • Poultry and Cheapside (Old Jewry to Bow Lane)
- • America Square (Crescent to Crosswall)
- • Finsbury Circus (in its entirety)
- • Cannon Street (Abchurch Lane to College Hill)
- • Giltspur Street (Newgate Street to West Smithfield)
- • Old Jewry (Lothbury to Poultry)
- • Watergate and Kingscote Street (New Bridge Street to Tudor Street)
- • Southampton Buildings (High Holborn to Chancery Lane)
- • Billiter Street and Fenchurch Avenue (Leadenhall Street to Fen Court)
- • College Hill (Cannon Street to College Street — two sections)
- • Crosswall (Crutched Friars to Minories)
- • Cornhill (Royal Exchange to Bishopsgate)
Some sections may be re-scheduled and the programme is subject to change wherever possible or applicable.
Why the programme matters for your claim
On a network where the Corporation admits at least a quarter of streets need resurfacing, a published programme of thirteen sections is selective — not comprehensive. If your incident was on a street not listed, the Corporation's planned investment does not prove your carriageway was maintained to a reasonable standard.
Conversely, if your defect was on a listed section that was deferred or re-scheduled, that is evidence of known maintenance need that was not addressed in time.
Claiming Against a Well-Run AMBER Authority
Honest assessment: the Corporation is not Derbyshire — here is how that changes your approach
What works in the Corporation's favour
- ✓ GREEN spend scorecard — invests well beyond its £70k DfT allocation
- ✓ Annual Coarse Visual Inspection on every street section
- ✓ Documented life-cycle programme and HMEP cornerstone
- ✓ Red priority share falling from 24% (2020) to 18% (2024)
- ✓ Utility streetworks co-ordination with programmed resurfacing
Expect a well-documented Section 58 defence. Generic claims on ceremonial routes will struggle.
What works in yours
- ✗ AMBER condition — 18% Red priority, 21% five-year average
- ✗ At least a quarter of network warranting resurfacing or renewal
- ✗ Other funding streams quadrupled to £494k in 2024/25
- ✗ Utility works admitted to shorten highway life by years
- ✗ No published pothole fill counts — only live fault data
- ✗ DfT weakest condition score on U-roads (39.0 index)
The winning strategy here is specificity
Against a Corporation with GREEN spend and a documented HMEP, your claim lives or dies on the specific defect and street:
- • Prior reports via the Corporation's highways fault-reporting system — proof of actual notice
- • Photos showing defect size, depth and visible age (weathered edges, prior patching, utility reinstatement)
- • CVI priority band — was your street Red or Dark Amber at the last annual survey?
- • Whether your section was on the 2025/26 resurfacing programme — or deferred
- • TfL red route check — confirm the Corporation is the correct highway authority
Mac builds exactly this case: he searches for prior reports, assesses your photo evidence, and cites the Corporation's own transparency data where it helps you.
Hit a Pothole in the Square Mile?
A well-documented authority demands a well-built claim. £35 for a professional claim pack.
DIY claim
- • Submit photos and invoices
- • Use generic template letter
- • No CVI priority-band argument
- • No utility streetworks analysis
- • No TfL red-route check
Professional claim pack
- ✅ 18% Red priority and £494k spend spike cited
- ✅ Utility-works life-shortening admission argued
- ✅ 2025/26 resurfacing programme cross-checked
- ✅ Prior fault reports searched and attached
- ✅ Section 58 rebuttal tailored to the Corporation
No percentage fees. You keep 100% of any compensation.
Frequently Asked Questions
The City of London spends over £1.2m a year on highways — can I still claim?
Yes. The DfT Spend scorecard is GREEN, but your claim turns on whether the specific defect that damaged your vehicle was reasonably inspected and repaired under Section 58 — not on aggregate spend across the Square Mile. The DfT Condition scorecard is AMBER, and the Corporation's own Coarse Visual Inspection data shows 18% of streets in Red priority in 2024, with a five-year average of 21%.
My pothole was on a red route — is the City Corporation responsible?
Probably not. The City of London Corporation is the highway authority for all streets in the Square Mile except four TfL Red Routes, for which Transport for London is responsible. Check whether your incident was on a borough-maintained street or a TfL red route before you claim. The Corporation's transparency report covers only the streets it maintains.
The council does not publish pothole fill counts — does that matter?
It can. Unlike most authorities, the Corporation does not estimate how many potholes it has filled in each of the last five years. It instead links to live pothole data. That absence does not block a claim, but it means your case should rest on photos of the specific defect, prior reports via the Corporation's fault-reporting system, and its published condition and spend data — not borough-wide pothole totals.
Does the Corporation's admission on utility works help my claim?
It can. The Corporation states that third-party utility interventions are "inevitable and frequent in the City" and can "demonstrably shorten or compromise the structural life cycle of the highway by a number of years." If your defect formed after utility excavations on or near your route, that is documented knowledge of an elevated risk — which raises what a reasonable inspection and repair regime must look like on that street.
Condition improved — Red streets fell from 24% to 18%. Does that weaken my claim?
Not automatically. The Corporation's own analysis still describes a "steady state" where roughly a quarter of the network has been renewed and at least a quarter remains in categories warranting resurfacing or renewal. Your claim turns on the specific defect: its size, age, prior reports and whether it sat in a Red-rated section at the last annual Coarse Visual Inspection.
What does the DfT AMBER best-practice rating mean for my claim?
The Corporation earns GREEN on spend and AMBER on condition and best practice. DfT scoring shows its weakest condition metric on unclassified roads (39.0 on the condition index). Expect a structured Section 58 defence backed by annual CVI surveys and a documented life-cycle programme — but utility disruption, reactive "make safes" and the Corporation's own resurfacing backlog still give grounds to challenge whether your specific defect was caught in time.
Data sources: Department for Transport — Local Road Maintenance Ratings 2025 to 2026 | City of London Corporation — Highway maintenance and operations transparency report (updated 6 May 2026). Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.