Source
Department for Transport — Local road maintenance ratings 2025 to 2026
amberOverall|amber Conditiongreen Spendamber Best Practice
Nottingham: GREEN Spend, Tripling RED on Local Roads
Nottingham City Council earns a GREEN DfT spend scorecard and points to £8.5m of Streets for People investment. Yet the overall rating is AMBER — because on the council's own preferred AEI survey, B and C roads in RED condition have tripled from 7% to 21% since 2020, A-road RED share more than doubled to 19%, and the council filled 17,133 potholes in 2023/24 alone on an 825km network where 82% is unclassified residential streets.
21%
B and C roads in RED condition (2024)
Up from 7% in 2020 on just 67km of classified local roads — while A-road RED share climbed from 8% to 19% over the same period under Nottingham's own Annual Engineering Inspection.
What The Condition Data Shows
Five years of Annual Engineering Inspection data from Nottingham's own transparency report — A-roads and B/C roads deteriorating on the council's preferred methodology
825km network — 82% unclassified residential streets
82km
A-roads (9.9%)
67km
B and C roads (8.1%)
676km
Unclassified (82%)
825km
Total carriageway
Nottingham City Council also manages 1,310km of footways, 206km of cycleways, 185 key bridges and structures, and 37,349 road gullies — but your pothole claim will almost certainly sit on one of the 676km of U-roads that dominate this network.
A-roads (82km): RED share more than doubled
| Year | Red | Amber | Green |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 8% | 47% | 45% |
| 2021 | 8% | 49% | 43% |
| 2022 | 10% | 47% | 43% |
| 2023 | 9% | 53% | 38% |
| 2024 | 19% | 31% | 51% |
A-road RED condition jumped from 8-10% to 19% in a single year to 2024 — roughly 16km of Nottingham's principal routes now in the worst category on the council's own survey.
B and C roads (67km): RED share tripled
| Year | Red | Amber | Green |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 7% | 52% | 41% |
| 2021 | 6% | 52% | 42% |
| 2022 | 6% | 52% | 42% |
| 2023 | 11% | 55% | 34% |
| 2024 | 21% | 23% | 56% |
B/C roads in RED climbed from 6-7% to 21% — a threefold increase. Good-condition green share recovered to 56% in 2024, but that does not erase the RED tripling the council itself reports on the roads connecting neighbourhoods to the wider network.
GREEN Spend — But Condition Still AMBER
£6.2m
Projected capital spend 2025/26
75%
Estimated preventative share 2025/26
£8.5m
Streets for People added since 2023
Nottingham's DfT Spend scorecard is GREEN — boosted by Levelling Up and CRSTS2 top-ups that took capital spend to £7.8m in 2023/24. Yet AEI condition data on the council's preferred methodology shows classified roads deteriorating anyway. Money is flowing; the network is still producing defects.
The 676km Residential Majority
82% of Nottingham's carriageway network is unclassified — and RED share is still climbing
| Year | U-roads in RED condition |
|---|---|
| 2020 | 12% |
| 2021 | 12% |
| 2022 | 12% |
| 2023 | 13% |
| 2024 | 14% |
~95km of Residential Roads in RED
Nottingham publishes only the RED percentage for unclassified roads — not the full amber/green split. At 14% RED on 676km, roughly 95km of estate streets, neighbourhood routes and local connectors sit in the worst condition category the council uses.
The AEI survey covers the entire highway network annually — so the council does collect data on your road. The question for Section 58 is what it did with that data before your pothole formed.
Streets for People — Ward-by-Ward Spend
The council allocated Streets for People grant funding across Nottingham's twenty wards using a formula based on ward population and index of multiple deprivation statistics — improving local roads for cycling and walking.
Ward-level investment is not the same as keeping every carriageway defect-free. If your road was not in a Streets for People scheme, the council's neighbourhood investment narrative does not help its Section 58 defence on your specific defect.
Why This Matters For Section 58
Under Section 41 of the Highways Act 1980, Nottingham City Council must maintain its highways. To rely on the Section 58 defence, it must show a reasonable inspection and repair system. On a network where 82% is U-roads, ask:
- • What did the annual AEI survey record for your road in the year before your incident?
- • With U-road RED share rising every year from 12% to 14%, what triggered action on yours?
- • Was your street in a Streets for People ward programme — or outside it entirely?
- • If B/C RED tripled on 67km of connector roads, what inspection priority did your residential route get?
A council that surveys the entire network annually cannot claim ignorance — only that it prioritised elsewhere.
The Methodology Switch
In 2024 Nottingham stopped reporting SCANNER data and switched to its own Annual Engineering Inspection
"In addition to this, NCC currently undertakes an Annual Engineering Inspection (AEI) condition survey on the entire highway network, and in 2024 took the decision to begin reporting the AEI condition figures and move away from SCANNER data. Given the methodology involved within the two surveys it was felt the AEI offered a more accurate condition, and was a truer reflection of the network, and its maintenance requirements."
— Nottingham City Council Local Highways Maintenance Transparency Report 2025
Why The Council Switched
Nottingham argues SCANNER's 10m and 20m Road Condition Index intervals do not reflect realistic treatment lengths for resurfacing schemes. AEI surveys are undertaken by professional engineers who record an effective treatment length — which the council says is more useful for capital planning.
For your claim, that is a double-edged sword: the council chose a methodology it believes shows truer condition — and that methodology shows A-road RED doubling and B/C RED tripling.
PAS 2161 From 2026/27
The council notes a new five-category BSI PAS 2161 standard will apply from 2026/27, replacing the current three-tier red/amber/green system. That will break the time series again — much like Nottingham's own 2024 switch from SCANNER to AEI.
If your incident falls during a transition year, ask which survey standard applied to your road and whether pre-2024 SCANNER data or post-2024 AEI data governs the council's knowledge of its condition.
50,051 Temporary Pothole Repairs in Five Years
The scale of reactive repair on an 825km city network
| Year | Temporary pothole repairs |
|---|---|
| 2020/21 | 5,446 |
| 2021/22 | 6,729 |
| 2022/23 | 6,862 |
| 2023/24 | 17,133 |
| 2024/25 | 13,881 |
| Five-year total | 50,051 |
"Number of potholes filled (temporary repairs) reduced as a result of increased 1st time permanent highway maintenance repairs and increased planned maintenance."
— Nottingham City Council Local Highways Maintenance Transparency Report 2025
The 2023/24 Spike
Temporary pothole repairs more than doubled from 6,862 to 17,133 between 2022/23 and 2023/24 — roughly 47 every day for a full year on an 825km network. That is the profile of a highway authority in reactive catch-up, not preventative control.
13,000 Planned for 2025/26
Nottingham's 2025/26 maintenance programme still expects 13,000 reactive/emergency pothole repairs — alongside 10.3km carriageway resurfacing, 7.2km surface treatments and 11,120m² preventative patching. Permanent works reduce temporary counts; they do not eliminate the defect pipeline.
Where The Money Goes
Capital and revenue spend from Nottingham's published tables — preventative share rising in 2025/26
| Year | DfT capital (£,000s) | Capital spend (£,000s) | Revenue spend (£,000s) | Preventative | Reactive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020/21 | £3,970 | £3,970 | £1,671 | 70% | 30% |
| 2021/22 | £2,765 | £2,765 | £1,671 | 62% | 38% |
| 2022/23 | £6,256* | £6,256* | £1,671 | 79% | 21% |
| 2023/24 | £7,765** | £7,765** | £1,971 | 80% | 20% |
| 2024/25 | £3,090 | £3,090 | £1,993 | 61% | 39% |
| 2025/26 (proj.) | £6,173*** | £6,173*** | £2,032 | 75% | 25% |
*Includes £3.50m Levelling Up Funding. **Includes £5.00m Levelling Up Funding. ***Includes £1.8m CRSTS2/TCR funding via EMCCA.
"The SfP increased spending on the public highway by £8.5m since 2023. We expect that the network will continue to improve given recent confirmation of £1.8m of funding secured via the East Midlands Combined County Authority (EMCCA) and CRSTS 2 (now TCR) for 2025/26."
— Nottingham City Council Local Highways Maintenance Transparency Report 2025
2025/26 Maintenance Programme Outputs
10.3km carriageway resurfacing
2.2km in situ recycling
7.2km surface treatments
11,120m² preventative patching
4.4km footway resurfacing
13,000 reactive pothole repairs
Over 28% of the 2025/26 programme is dedicated to surface treatments and preventative patching — yet the council still budgets for 13,000 emergency pothole repairs on an 825km network.
Claiming Against a GREEN-Spend AMBER Council
Honest assessment: Nottingham invests seriously — here's how that changes your approach
What Works In The Council's Favour
- ✓ GREEN spend scorecard — capital boosted by Levelling Up and CRSTS2 top-ups
- ✓ 75% preventative spend projected for 2025/26
- ✓ Full-network AEI survey annually — not an alternate-year blind spot
- ✓ £8.5m Streets for People investment since 2023 across all twenty wards
- ✓ Published asset management approach aligned to Well-Managed Highway Infrastructure
Expect a documented Section 58 defence citing inspection regimes and ward investment. Generic claims will struggle.
What Works In Yours
- ✗ AMBER condition — B/C RED tripled from 7% to 21% on the council's preferred AEI data
- ✗ A-road RED more than doubled to 19% in 2024
- ✗ U-road RED rising every year — 12% to 14%, roughly 95km of residential streets
- ✗ 50,051 temporary pothole repairs in five years — 17,133 in 2023/24 alone
- ✗ Council admits AEI shows "truer" condition than SCANNER — and chose to publish worse numbers
The Winning Strategy Here Is Specificity
Against a council with GREEN spend and a full-network AEI survey, 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)
- • Whether your road was in a Streets for People ward scheme — or excluded from recent investment
- • The road's class — on a U-road, cite the rising 12-14% RED trend and ask what the AEI recorded for your street
- • Timing relative to the 2024 SCANNER-to-AEI switch — which dataset governs the council's knowledge?
Mac builds exactly this case: he searches for prior reports, assesses your photo evidence, and cites Nottingham's own transparency data where it helps you.
Hit a Pothole in Nottingham?
A well-funded council demands a well-built claim. £35 for a professional claim pack.
DIY Claim
- • Submit photos and invoices
- • Use generic template letter
- • No AEI methodology argument
- • No prior-report search
- • No Streets for People ward analysis
Professional Claim Pack
- ✅ B/C RED tripling documented from council AEI data
- ✅ 17,133 repairs in 2023/24 cited
- ✅ U-road 14% RED trend argued
- ✅ Prior reports searched and attached
- ✅ Section 58 rebuttal tailored to Nottingham
No percentage fees. You keep 100% of any compensation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Nottingham earns a GREEN spend scorecard — can I still claim for pothole damage?
Yes. The DfT Spend scorecard is GREEN, but your claim turns on whether the specific defect was reasonably inspected and repaired under Section 41 of the Highways Act 1980 — not on aggregate spend. Nottingham's own AEI condition data shows A-road RED share more than doubled (8% to 19%) and B/C-road RED share tripled (7% to 21%) between 2020 and 2024, while unclassified roads in RED rose from 12% to 14%.
What if my pothole was on a residential street in Nottingham?
Unclassified roads make up 676km — 82% of Nottingham City Council's 825km carriageway network. The council publishes only the RED percentage for U-roads, which climbed steadily from 12% in 2020 to 14% in 2024 — roughly 95km of residential streets in the worst condition category. On a network that size, ask when your specific road was last condition-surveyed and what the AEI recorded.
Nottingham switched from SCANNER to AEI surveys in 2024 — does that weaken my claim?
No — if anything it strengthens scrutiny. The council itself says it moved away from SCANNER because AEI "offered a more accurate condition, and was a truer reflection of the network, and its maintenance requirements." That is an admission the previous national data understated local need. If your incident post-dates the switch, the council chose a methodology that shows worse condition on A and B/C roads — and cannot revert to SCANNER to downplay it.
Does the drop from 17,133 to 13,881 pothole repairs mean the roads are fixed?
No. Nottingham still filled 13,881 temporary pothole repairs in 2024/25 — about 38 every day — and plans 13,000 reactive/emergency pothole repairs for 2025/26. The council's own footnote states the 2024/25 reduction reflects increased first-time permanent repairs and planned maintenance, not a network-wide recovery. B/C roads in RED still sit at 21% under the council's preferred AEI methodology.
Does Nottingham's Streets for People funding help the council defend my claim?
Not automatically. The council says Streets for People added £8.5m to highway spending since 2023 and expects further improvement from EMCCA/CRSTS2 funding. But its own condition tables show deterioration on A and B/C roads over the same period. Investment in walking and cycling routes does not prove the specific carriageway defect that damaged your vehicle was inspected, prioritised, or repaired in time.
Data sources: Department for Transport — Local Road Maintenance Ratings 2025 to 2026 | Nottingham City 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.