I expect you have a snowballs chance in hell of proving anyone else at fault except yourself.

However i do have sympathywith you because you've most likely hit this raised section with the offside of the car, and modern lights have horrible sharp cut off to the beam pattern just where you needed it...yet pointlessly pour masses of light upwards and to the left, so if a sniper happend to be lurking up a tree on the nearside you'll spot him no trouble, handy that eh.

I dislike these modern lights which are often too bright in the lit section but due to the precise beams there is little light scatter beyond the beam at that point and due to how bright they are anything beyoond is in complete darkness contrast, problem exacerbated now that so many other cars have stupidly bright lights too.

We've discussed the light wars here recently, i feel that older generation lights were better for normal driving, they might not have been as bright in the beam but with a bit of light scatter fading outwards dark objects beyond the beam pattern weren't so unseeable.

I am with the council. If you lack the ability to recognise and identify hazards and obstacles on the highway and take appropriate action..........do I need to go on?

Next!

Sorry the guys are right ...

You cannot compare a pothole to a roundabout, and I don't think you have an excuse in either case, the rules state that you must drive at a speed that you can stop or divert should an unexpected hazard come into view, hence the teachings behind the new hazard perception test.

People often state that like in this case, when they hit something on a blind corner it was not their fault, like my brother almost did, but you cannot blame it on the obstruction, as correctly stated you must drive for the length of road you can see with your own eyes and not for the length of road you think is there.

Also roundabouts are usually almost always in front of you, with signage on the road to also tell you, and there may very well be a triangle on the road indicating a give way junction, there is never just the 1 sign.

Councils are not responsible if you fail to slow down for a pothole or any other obstruction, it is your responsibility, to see any obstruction in good time and either divert, or slow down enough to go slowly over the obstruction.

But car drivers are a funny breed, I find ( sorry for those that are not ) My friend managed to b***** up both tires going over a pothole, he live in the country and we all know how bad these lanes can be so extra care must be taken, anyway, he claimed he was not able to see it in time to slow down, so I said it must have been a sizeable hole to do such damage, he admitted it was but insisted he could not slow down and the reason he gave was because there was a car behind him.

What actually happened was he just didnt ee it until it was too late, and that would suggest he was not paying enough due care and attention at that time for the road he was on, and that is really the point, you have to drive to the conditions of both the road you are on and other elements that may affect your ability to see and to stop at whats that phrase as old fashioned as it may be it still applies, oh yes OVERALL STOPPING DISTANCE.

Finally one other element that most car drivers dont think of, fog it makes your brakes wet and increases your stopping distance, yet how many slow down sooner, after the fog has lifted even though it may still be damp in the air.

You should take the advice of others and keep quiet about it, I have not been able to see teh video as th elink does not seem to work for me, copied and pasted etc, as I said before there is something called overall stopping distance which means if an obstruction appears then can you stop without hitting it, if the answer is no tehn you are to close or driving too fast.

driving without due care and attention which usually applies to any stationary hazard when struck, usually means lack of attention/experience.forsight on the part of the driver, as noted by others if you are travelling on any road and you cannot stop for the road that you see then you are travelling too fast.

Insofar as the council are concerned, they have no liability in 90% of cases when a stationary object is struck, because as someone else stated it is your responsibility to drive at a rate that you can stop if need be.

Safe way is to assume that you MIGHT HAVE TO STOP OR SLOW DOWN, if you dont have a clear view. for eg if you are approaching a pedestrian crossing, half of it is blocked from view because of a goods vehicle or some other large vehicle, and you choose to not slow down until you can see .... you then hit someone or have to slam on your breaks, why because you assumed that no one was there, rather then the safer option of assuming someone is.

I do find it, how can I say amazing that so many and thankfully still a small percentage of car drivers fail to accept they ultimatly are responsbile for the vehicle they drive, they alone are controlling that vehicle not some god, or lucky elf, and it is your actions that decide if you make it to your destination or you don't.

RTC's are caused by only 2 reasons ..

1 .. something you did but should not have.

2 .. Something you did not do but should have.

One final thought, I am assuming that this is not the first time you have been down this road, so surely you must have had some idea of the road layout ahead ?