Volunteers helping to patch up Devon’s deluge of potholes are not automatically covered by insurance if they injure themselves, an architect of the scheme has claimed.

Stuart Hughes, who helped launch the Community Road Warden scheme in 2014, said he had recently suffered a hernia while filling potholes in his local area but found out he wasn’t covered by any insurance.

Devon County Council said all its documentation linked to the scheme makes it clear that cover applies to third-party injury or damage only.

Mr Hughes, who oversaw the highways department at County Hall for much of his tenure as a county councillor, said he was recently lifting a compactor out of a 4X4 vehicle  when he “felt something go”.

“I didn’t take too much notice of it initially but then a couple of days later it came up, and hurt a bit, and when I made some enquiries about whether I am covered by insurance, I was told I wasn’t,” he said.

Mr Hughes, who still represents the Sidmouth Sidford ward on East Devon District Council, added that since it was more likely that older residents would be getting involved in the road warden scheme, his advice would be to “think about it first before you just go ahead and do it”.

“The council is encouraging more people to get involved, and if you are doing that, you are going to end up with people getting injured,” he said.

“It should be explained to them as while you volunteer to do it, it should be clear as to whether you are covered or not if you injure yourself.”

Road warden schemes are usually overseen by town or parish councils after gaining the required permissions and training from Devon County Council, and so volunteers may want to ask their respective parish whether any specific insurance coverage exists for them.

A Devon County Council spokesperson said: “Where a local council carries out pothole warden work in accordance with its agreement with Devon County Council, any accidental damage to third-party property, or injury to a third party, would be covered by the council’s public liability insurance.

“The agreement makes clear that this cover applies to third-party injury or damage only.”

The clarity about the road warden scheme comes as there is renewed impetus behind the initiative to help tackle the state of Devon’s roads.

Officially, the council only repairs damage that meets certain specifications – namely 40mm deep and 300mm wide. At that point, it is considered a safety defect and is repaired, but smaller holes generally are not.

However, the cabinet member for highways, Councillor Dan Thomas (Liberal Democrat, South Brent & Yealmpton) confirmed a trial taking place in two areas, which allowed crews to fix any other damage they saw close to the original defect they were repairing, would be extended.

This past winter has proved brutal for Devon’s roads, with 8,340 potholes recorded in January this year – a huge 50 per cent spike on the 5,250 recorded in the same month in 2025 – albeit not all of those would qualify as formal ‘safety defects’ and could include duplicate reports.

Analysis of the trial showed that pothole reports decreased during the trial, suggesting it had a positive impact on repairs, while the repair of holes that didn’t yet qualify as formal safety defects prevented them worsening.

Elsewhere, literature promoting the pothole warden scheme recently prompted some complaints from councillors.

Councillor Ed Hill (Independent, Pinhoe and Mincinglake) and Councillor Michael Fife Cook (Reform UK, Yelverton Rural) queried the leaflet being distributed during a pre-election period for Plymouth and Exeter, and also raised issues with the fact that Liberal Democrat branding was on the leaflet yet it appeared to have been fact-checked by council officers.

“The matter was raised with the county solicitor and has been discussed with members,” a spokesperson for Devon County Council said.

“No further action is being taken. The handbook was written by Councillor Louise Wainwright on her own initiative. It is not a county council document, has not been officially endorsed by the county council, and has not been funded by the council.

“Officers were asked to fact-check the technical information in the document. That does not make it a county council publication or imply endorsement by the authority.”