The Council is being demanding

Apples2

OP, you are implying the bin men are victimising you.

You are suggesting there is absolutely no difficulty whatsoever with a bin lorry driving up and down so they have simply "got it in for you".

Do you HONESTLY think they are simply picking on you and have gone out of their way to deliver letters to all the houses "just for fun" or "just out of spite"???

Why is it so difficult to get it into your new joiner skull that the bin lorry is struggling to get past the parked cars so have sent letters asking for your co-operation???

derrick

4743hudsonj wrote: »

I think alot of people are missing the point that the council seem to be complaining about the location when compared to the opposing junction.
Remember the highway code says cars should not park within 10 metres of any junction:) (i am aware this isn't law, just good sense)

I think rule 242,(under the must not rule, i.e relates to RT Laws), covers that

242
You MUST NOT leave your vehicle or trailer in a dangerous position or where it causes any unnecessary obstruction of the road.

[Laws RTA 1988, sect 22 & CUR reg 103]




.

4743hudsonj

derrick wrote: »

I think rule 242,(under the must not rule, i.e relates to RT Laws), covers that

242
You MUST NOT leave your vehicle or trailer in a dangerous position or where it causes any unnecessary obstruction of the road.

[Laws RTA 1988, sect 22 & CUR reg 103]




.

Cheers wasn't aware this was in the Road Traffic Act, i thought it was just a bobby's discretion as to whether it was a significant hazard or not.

Just found this, surly this cover it exactly?

243

[DO NOT stop or park] opposite or within 10 metres (32 feet) of a junction, except in an authorised parking space

derrick

4743hudsonj wrote: »

Cheers wasn't aware this was in the Road Traffic Act, i thought it was just a bobby's discretion as to whether it was a significant hazard or not.

Just found this, surly this cover it exactly?

243

Only the words MUST, and MUST NOT, relate to TR Laws as in the INTRODUCTION of the HC;-
"Many of the rules in the Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or be disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words ‘MUST/MUST NOT’. In addition, the rule includes an abbreviated reference to the legislation which creates the offence. An explanation of the abbreviations can be found in 'The road user and the law'."


Other words such as DO NOT , SHOULD NOT are advisory, although by not observing the HC you could be booked for other offences;-

"Although failure to comply with the other rules of the Code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts (see 'The road user and the law') to establish liability. This includes rules which use advisory wording such as ‘should/should not’ or ‘do/do not’."



.

Zandoni

lucylucky wrote: »

Maybe you can show me the abusive posts then if the OP can't?

I wouldn't say abusive but certainly rude and unfriendly.

ryanfitton

Yep .. definitely not the best manners to someone who was only asking a question, I was being polite in my first post and people on the forum could have been more friendlier towards me; also seeing as it was my first post.

dmg24

Zandoni wrote: »

I wouldn't say abusive but certainly rude and unfriendly.

Rude and unfriendly are very much in the eye of the beholder. I think that most of your posts are pretty rude and very unfriendly. Should I be reporting you, or should I just accept that people have different opinions and get on with it?

ryanfitton

dmg24 wrote: »

Rude and unfriendly are very much in the eye of the beholder. I think that most of your posts are pretty rude and very unfriendly. Should I be reporting you, or should I just accept that people have different opinions and get on with it?

could you please show me how my posts have been rude and unfriendly?

lucylucky

Perhaps your first post set the tone.....

The title "The Council is being demanding" is in fact erroneous

You state "I do not want to move the car when the refuse wagons come and i feel that there is enough room where i have parked my car for them to manoevure. What are my rights concerning this letter? "

What "rights" were you seeking?
You of course have a right of reply to the council, but they see you moving your car (and I am sure others) as the solution to a problem which you seem(ed) unwilling to recognise.

I would suggest that some of the replies were in the same vein.

4743hudsonj

ryanfitton wrote: »

Yep .. definitely not the best manners to someone who was only asking a question, I was being polite in my first post and people on the forum could have been more friendlier towards me; also seeing as it was my first post.

Well dont you think you've had pretty poor manners towards your neighbours and the bin men. First post or not, any poster posting what you have would get the same response, personally, i would expect no better.