Source
Department for Transport — Local road maintenance ratings 2025 to 2026
amberOverall|amber Conditiongreen Spendamber Best Practice
676 Potholes in One Year on 203km of West London Roads
Hammersmith & Fulham is one of London's smallest highway networks — just 202.6km — yet the council filled 676 potholes in 2023/24 alone, more than double any other year on record. The DfT rates spend GREEN, but the overall scorecard is AMBER: 13% of principal A-roads still miss the council's own 5% disrepair target, and 79% of the network is residential streets where 13% remain in RED condition.
676
Potholes filled in 2023/24
On a network smaller than most market towns — 202.6km total, with 159.3km of residential U-roads. The council expects 300–400 repairs in 2025/26, in line with historic trends.
A Borough-Sized Network
Hammersmith & Fulham manages one of the smallest highway inventories in England — dense urban streets where every defect sits close to heavy traffic
26.8 km
A-roads (13.2%)
Bus routes, principal traffic
16.7 km
B/C roads (8.2%)
Links between A and U roads
159.3 km
U-roads (78.6%)
Mostly residential quieter roads
Section 41 — Statutory Duty, Compact Network
Hammersmith & Fulham acknowledges a statutory duty under Section 41 of the Highways Act 1980 to manage and maintain the public highway. On a network this small, there is nowhere to hide: 676 pothole repairs in a single year on 203km means defects were forming at a rate of roughly one repair every 300 metres of road, every year.
Your claim turns on whether the council's inspection regime caught the specific defect before it damaged your vehicle — not on borough-wide averages.
What The Condition Data Shows
AI-driven LoHEG survey data from the council's own transparency report — improving trends, but RED roads remain on every class
A-roads (26.8km — 13% of network): improving but off-target
| Year | Red | Amber | Green |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022/23 | 23% | 25% | 52% |
| 2023/24 | 19% | 33% | 48% |
| 2024/25 | 13% | 36% | 51% |
RED A-roads have halved in three years (23% → 13%). Credit where due. But the council's own target for the Borough Principal Road Network is 5% disrepair — and 13% of A-roads remain in RED condition, more than double that benchmark.
B and C roads (16.7km — 8% of network): comparable data from 2023/24 only
| Year | Red | Amber | Green |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023/24 | 17% | 32% | 51% |
| 2024/25 | 11% | 32% | 57% |
B/C RED fell from 17% to 11% in one year. The council switched from internal inspector surveys to AI LoHEG methodology in 2023/24 — earlier figures cannot be compared.
U-roads (159.3km — 79% of network): where most claims happen
| Year | Red | Amber | Green |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023/24 | 23% | 31% | 46% |
| 2024/25 | 13% | 31% | 56% |
RED U-roads fell sharply from 23% to 13% — but 13% of 159.3km is still roughly 21km of residential streets in major deterioration. Nearly a third of U-roads (31%) sit in AMBER, where maintenance may soon be required.
"As seen in Figure 1, the proportion of poor condition on A roads has reduced over the last 3 years with maintenance works being carried out. However, more investment is needed to bring the overall Borough Principal Road Network up to the set level of service of 5% disrepair."
— Hammersmith & Fulham Council Local Highways Maintenance Transparency Report 2025
"Before 2023/24, the condition surveys were completed internally by inspectors and thus cannot be compared with condition surveys done since."
— Hammersmith & Fulham Council Local Highways Maintenance Transparency Report 2025
GREEN Spend on a Compact Network
Hammersmith & Fulham projects more than five times its DfT capital allocation — yet reactive maintenance is rising again
| Year | DfT allocation | Capital spend | Revenue spend | Preventative | Reactive | Resurfaced (km) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020/21 | — | £985k | £1,456k | 40% | 60% | 5.0 |
| 2021/22 | — | £1,785k | £939k | 66% | 34% | 4.3 |
| 2022/23 | — | £1,899k | £1,407k | 57% | 43% | 8.4 |
| 2023/24 | £109k | £2,653k | £1,586k | 63% | 37% | 7.5 |
| 2024/25 | £109k | £2,254k | £1,649k | 58% | 42% | 5.3 |
| 2025/26 (proj.) | £356k | £1,880k | £1,610k | 54% | 46% | 5.4 |
Why Spend Is GREEN
The council projects £1.88m capital spend against a £356k DfT allocation in 2025/26 — over five times the central government grant. Combined capital and revenue spend reaches £3.49m on just 203km of roads.
Additional TfL funding of up to £200k per year targets the Borough Principal Road Network routes in poorest condition.
The Reactive Creep
Reactive maintenance share is projected to rise to 46% in 2025/26 — up from 37% in 2023/24. The council is requesting additional capital funds to increase planned maintenance and reduce costlier reactive work.
In 2020/21, 60% of spend was reactive. The borough has been here before.
"We recently undertook an investment modelling exercise to review our highway maintenance spending against deterioration trends on the network and the challenges our roads and footways will face over the next 10 years. As a result, we are requesting additional capital funds to increase our planned maintenance activities and reduce the need for costlier reactive maintenance activities."
— Hammersmith & Fulham Council Local Highways Maintenance Transparency Report 2025
The 676-Pothole Year
Four years of published repair data — and one extraordinary spike
| Year | Potholes filled |
|---|---|
| 2021/22 | 201 |
| 2022/23 | 274 |
| 2023/24 | 676 |
| 2024/25 | 314 |
| Four-year total | 1,465 |
"In the last 5 years, we have filled around 1,500 potholes, with a peak of 676 potholes throughout 2023/24, as seen in Table 2. We expect to fill between 300 – 400 potholes this year, in line with historic trends."
— Hammersmith & Fulham Council Local Highways Maintenance Transparency Report 2025
More Than Double Any Other Year
The 676 repairs in 2023/24 are 2.5 times the 2022/23 figure and more than double 2024/25. On a 203km network, that is roughly 3.3 pothole repairs per kilometre in a single year — a network producing defects at an elevated rate, by the council's own count.
Claims Feed The Works Programme
The council incorporates residents' claims and enquiries into its planned maintenance priority scoring. A prior report of the same defect is not just evidence for your claim — it is data the council says it uses to decide where to spend.
How Hammersmith & Fulham Inspects Its Roads
AI surveys, risk-based hierarchy, and the Section 58 questions they raise
Survey Methodology
- • A-roads: yearly LoHEG driven surveys with a trained AI defect model
- • B/C and U-roads: annual AI surveys under LoHEG methodology from 2023/24
- • Invalid survey sections: less than 5% of the network (weather, lighting)
- • No A-road condition surveys in 2020 and 2021 due to Covid-19
Safety Inspections
- • Risk-based Network Hierarchy per LoTAG guidance
- • Inspection frequency set by road risk and criticality
- • Defects raised with specific response times in the HMMP
- • All reactive jobs recorded in an Asset Management System
"Inspectors identify defects and raise repair orders with specific response times, as detailed in the Highways Maintenance Management Plan (HMMP). Reactive maintenance ensures serviceability and safety of the assets in line with our statutory duty to maintain the public highway under Section 41 of the Highways Act 1980 and all jobs are recorded in an Asset Management System to allow the Council to monitor the works carried out and understand maintenance needs."
— Hammersmith & Fulham Council Local Highways Maintenance Transparency Report 2025
Section 58 — What To Ask
To rely on the Section 58 defence, Hammersmith & Fulham must show a reasonable system for knowing and fixing defects. On this borough's data, ask:
- • Was your road inspected at the frequency the HMMP requires for its risk category?
- • If 676 potholes were filled in 2023/24, why wasn't yours caught before it caused damage?
- • Did you report the defect before your incident — and was it incorporated into the priority score?
- • On a U-road, can the council only point to two years of comparable AI survey data?
- • With 46% reactive spend projected, was the repair a patch or a lasting treatment?
A council that records every job in an asset management system has the data to answer these questions — and you have the right to ask.
What The Council Plans for 2025/26
Resurfacing targets, climate resilience, and the gap between plan and daily defects
5.4 km
Carriageway resurfacing planned
17
Roads across borough wards
300–400
Potholes expected to fill
Resilience+ and Climate Pressure
The council has defined a risk-based Resilience+ Network for winter gritting and emergency access. It also acknowledges that climate change is driving harsher winters, warmer summers, and short extreme rainfall events — all of which accelerate carriageway deterioration.
As Lead Local Flood Authority, the council is incorporating SuDS schemes to manage surface water. If your pothole formed after heavy rainfall, the drainage context may matter.
"Public Claims and Enquiries: We incorporate our residents' claims and enquiries to ensure spending is focused in areas of public interest"
— Hammersmith & Fulham Council Local Highways Maintenance Transparency Report 2025
Claiming Against a GREEN-Spend AMBER Borough
Honest assessment: Hammersmith & Fulham invests heavily — here's how that changes your approach
What Works In The Council's Favour
- ✓ GREEN spend — capital investment over five times the DfT allocation
- ✓ Condition improving on all road classes in comparable survey data
- ✓ Annual AI LoHEG surveys on A, B/C and U-roads
- ✓ Documented HMMP with specific defect response times
- ✓ Claims and enquiries formally incorporated into maintenance prioritisation
Expect a structured Section 58 defence. Generic claims will struggle on principal roads.
What Works In Yours
- ✗ AMBER condition — 13% of A-roads and U-roads still in RED in 2024/25
- ✗ BPRN misses the council's own 5% disrepair target (13% RED on A-roads)
- ✗ 676 pothole repairs in 2023/24 — defects forming faster than catch-up
- ✗ 79% of network is U-roads — roughly 21km still in RED condition
- ✗ Pre-2023/24 B/C and U-road data not comparable — limits historical defence
- ✗ Reactive spend rising to 46% projected in 2025/26
The Winning Strategy Here Is Specificity
Against a borough with GREEN spend and improving condition trends, your claim lives or dies on the specific defect:
- • Prior reports of the same pothole (FixMyStreet, council reports) — proof of actual notice
- • Photos showing the defect's size, depth and visible age (weathered edges, previous patching)
- • The road's class — on a U-road, the 2023/24 spike and 13% RED rate are your strongest arguments
- • Timing relative to the 676-repair year if your incident falls in 2023/24
Mac builds exactly this case: he searches for prior reports, assesses your photo evidence, and cites Hammersmith & Fulham's own transparency data where it helps you.
Hit a Pothole in Hammersmith & Fulham?
A well-funded borough demands a well-built claim. £35 for a professional claim pack.
DIY Claim
- • Submit photos and invoices
- • Use generic template letter
- • No 676-repair spike argument
- • No prior-report search
- • No U-road condition data cited
Professional Claim Pack
- ✅ 676 pothole peak documented
- ✅ 13% RED U-road rate argued
- ✅ BPRN 5% target miss cited
- ✅ Prior reports searched and attached
- ✅ Section 58 rebuttal tailored to H&F
No percentage fees. You keep 100% of any compensation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Hammersmith & Fulham has GREEN spend — can I still claim?
Yes. The DfT Spend scorecard is GREEN because the council projects £1.88m capital spend against a £356k DfT allocation in 2025/26. But the overall rating is AMBER on condition — 13% of A-roads and 13% of U-roads were in RED condition in 2024/25. Section 58 turns on whether the specific defect that damaged your vehicle was reasonably inspected and repaired, not on aggregate spend.
What if my pothole was on a residential street?
Unclassified roads make up 159.3km — 79% of the borough network. In 2024/25, 13% of U-roads were in RED condition (roughly 21km of residential streets). The council surveys U-roads annually using AI-driven LoHEG methodology, but only from 2023/24 onwards — pre-2023/24 inspector data cannot be compared with current figures.
Does the 676 pothole peak in 2023/24 help my claim?
It can. Hammersmith & Fulham filled 676 potholes in 2023/24 — more than double any other year in its published data and against a network of just 202.6km. That is an admission the borough was producing defects at an elevated rate. If your incident falls in or near that period, the council's own repair volume supports an argument that defects were forming faster than inspections caught them.
The council says road condition is improving — does that weaken my claim?
Not automatically. RED-condition U-roads did fall from 23% to 13% between 2023/24 and 2024/25, and A-road RED fell from 23% to 13% over three years. But the council still admits its Borough Principal Road Network misses the 5% disrepair target — 13% of A-roads remain in RED. Improvement at network level does not prove the specific pothole that damaged your car was reasonably known about and fixed.
Can the council use pre-2023/24 condition data in its Section 58 defence?
The council itself states that before 2023/24, B/C and U-road condition surveys were completed internally by inspectors and thus cannot be compared with AI LoHEG surveys done since. For claims on residential streets, that limits how far back the council can point to consistent condition records — your prior reports and photos become more important.
Data sources: Department for Transport — Local Road Maintenance Ratings 2025 to 2026 | Hammersmith & Fulham Council Local Highways Maintenance Transparency Report (June 2025). Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
Reusable evidence record
Council rating evidence and provenance
Rating period: 2025-2026 · Reviewed 19 July 2026
Observed DfT fact
Overall AMBER; condition AMBER; spend GREEN; best practice AMBER.
Cautious interpretation
This is network-level context. The rating does not determine liability for a particular incident or establish what was known about a specific defect.
Correction status: No correction recorded.