Enforceable signage?

derrick

Do the words on this sign,(strictly residents parking only), carry any weight? There is no other signage, and the LA tell me the road is unadopted and privately maintained. The DY lines that change shade and alignment are probably done by the residents/landlord.
The post code for anyone wanting to use Google maps is:- PR7 1PQ



.

vax2002

Absolutely non whatsoever, The traffic Regulation Order is allowed to cover 18 meters from the main road to protect the junction, after that the lines end and it is a free for all if it has no gate or barrier, the sign is ornamental and has no authority.

derrick

vax2002 wrote: »

Absolutely non whatsoever, The traffic Regulation Order is allowed to cover 18 meters from the main road to protect the junction, after that the lines end and it is a free for all if it has no gate or barrier, the sign is ornamental and has no authority.

Thought it was, just wanted some clarification

So if I parked on that road and come back to find a clamp, (or flat tyres, broken mirrors etc), what would be the advice as I doubt the police would attend.

.

vax2002

Unless there is clear sings warning of a clamp and it is clamped by a SIA authorised operative, the Law says you may cut the clamp off:

Place this notice on your dash :

CONTRACTUAL NOTICE: any Item left in contact with this vehicle will be become property of the vehicle keeper to do so as they wish, by reading this contract you are legally bound by the agreement to pass title ownership of any item you place in contact with this vehicle to the registered keeper and that property shall become the sole property of the vehicle keeper. If you do not agree with this contract you must desist from placing any object or artefact in contact with the vehicle or any part of the vehicle in any way shape or form No exemptions:

The_Slithy_Tove

derrick wrote: »

So if I parked on that road and come back to find a clamp, (or flat tyres, broken mirrors etc), what would be the advice as I doubt the police would attend.

Hope you're not trying to take the p*** by parking on someone else's private property in order to avoid paying to park, e.g. at the hospital. PPCs thrive on (mis-)managing parking on people's land precisely because some decide they're going to park on what's not far off someone else's shared drive.

Coupon-mad

The_Slithy_Tove wrote: »

Hope you're not trying to take the p*** by parking on someone else's private property in order to avoid paying to park, e.g. at the hospital. PPCs thrive on (mis-)managing parking on people's land precisely because some decide they're going to park on what's not far off someone else's shared drive.

That's a good point.

We cannot condone any unsociable parking which actually supports a PPC's flawed spiel about why they exist.

Stephen_Leak

Lines and signs on private land don't have the force of law ... but it's a good idea to treat them like it was the public highway.

vax2002

This is a money saving forum, if he has found somewhere he can park legally and save money then good on him and the day we change our behaviour because we are scared of what some private parking scammer thinks then its game over.

The_Slithy_Tove

vax2002 wrote: »

This is a money saving forum, if he has found somewhere he can park legally and save money then good on him and the day we change our behaviour because we are scared of what some private parking scammer thinks then its game over.

But we also encourage ethical and sociable behaviour. I have no truck with the parking scammers, and there's nothing to say that one is operating at this location. But it's people's anti-social parking that may trigger the residents' association (who probably have to pay for the upkeep of the unadopted road) into a knee-jerk reaction and getting one of these vampires in.

Hadeon

vax2002 wrote: »

This is a money saving forum, if he has found somewhere he can park legally and save money then good on him and the day we change our behaviour because we are scared of what some private parking scammer thinks then its game over.

Sorry vax, but I disagree with you very strongly on this one.

Just because an action may be 'legal' (or to put it more accurately, may not be illegal)doesn't necessarily make it right.
Is that not the very reasoning many of our beloved & respected (sic) MPs applied to justify their abhorrent actions in the expenses scandal?

Yes, this is a money saving forum, but that saving should never be made by deliberately taking advantage of, and at the expense (in the widest meaning of the word) and inconvenience caused to others.

Finally, I am unable to see the relevance/connection between your comment in first part of your sentence and the point you make in the second.

esmerobbo

There seems to be some history here!

"Earlier this week I was called urgently to Chorley Hospital as an elderly relative was, unfortunately, dying.

As the hospital car park was full, and traffic through the roadworks terrible, I parked my car on Strawberry Fields for around 45 minutes.

When I returned, my windscreen was covered in Post It notes telling me that this was a private road with resident-only parking.

Can I please point out to the person who did this, that Strawberry Fields is a public highway, adopted by Chorley council, and not subject to any parking restrictions.

I note the residents have (quite illegally) attached their own sign to the council-supplied item saying 'Private – residents only'.

Strawberry Fields is a lovely location, but I'm afraid the residents can't separate themselves from the rest of the borough, we all pay council tax, we are entitled to park there.

I really think these people should either get lives or move to gated communities".

From here! http://www.chorley-guardian.co.uk/news/opinions_february_8_2006_1_2014350

Also if you look at the street view the DYL's are not broken as in the OP's picture.

http://g.co/maps/n3fem