Protection of Freedoms Act Oct 2012

trisontana

What is the definition of "illegally parked" on private land. Except in very exceptional circumstances I would have thought that a car left on private land would come under civil and not criminal law.

bazster

trisontana wrote: »

What is the definition of "illegally parked" on private land. Except in very exceptional circumstances I would have thought that a car left on private land would come under civil and not criminal law.

"Illegally" is the term used in the Act, in reference to the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, which contains a section headed:

Removal of vehicles illegally, obstructively or dangerously parked, or abandoned or broken down.

Vehicles to which this applies are defined as follows:

...vehicles which have been permitted to remain at rest—
(a)on a road in contravention of any statutory prohibition or restriction, or
(b)on a road in such a position or in such condition or in such circumstances as to cause obstruction to other persons using the road or as to be likely to cause danger to such persons, or
(c)on a road, or on any land in the open air, in such a position or in such condition or in such circumstances as to appear, to an authority empowered by the regulations to remove such vehicles, to have been abandoned without lawful authority,or which have broken down on a road.

This will be amended by POFA such that "road" will be extended to "road or other land". This seems to cover the situation of someone parking on a private driveway: they are most certainly causing an obstruction if the home-owner wishes to park there!

trisontana

bazster wrote: »

Sheer pedantry.

Except that phrase is used in the act. They should have known better.

Oldfatgrumpy

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

Does that mean that, if I came home one day, to find a car parked on my driveway, I can't park my car behind it, and have to instead park on the road, until the owner removes the offending car?

It happened to me once when I found a shiny new car on my drive, (with the keys posted through my letterbox) which had been left at the wrong address by a car hire company. When I worked out what had happened I took the keys with me when I went out so I could drop them off at the hire company's office as I was going to pass it a couple of hours later. While I was out they turned up at my door and were quite annoyed with my son (only person at home) at not being able to get the keys instantly and drive the car away!

bazster

trisontana wrote: »

Except that phrase is used in the act. They should have known better.

Amended to reflect this.

LincolnshireYokel

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

Does that mean that, if I came home one day, to find a car parked on my driveway, I can't park my car behind it, and have to instead park on the road, until the owner removes the offending car?

Looks like it. Your only option would be to push it onto the public highway or ring the police and ask them to tow it away.

to move a vehicle, with a view to denying the owner access to it.

If you merely push it out the way onto the public highway, you are not denying the owner access. So as I read that, this woudl be legal. OFC, if it was then sprawled across the public highway causing an obstruction because the steering was locked, i assume you could then ring the police to tow it away.


Ofc if the brakes were on, you couldnt push it. However, you coudl probably put a trolley jack under the rear end and lift the handbraked wheels off the ground to roll it off your land. I wonder if this then would be classed as 'towing'. Again, as I read it, towing is 'towing with intent to deprive'.

[Deleted User]

Hang on a minute.

with a view to denying the owner access to it.

So, I'd only be committing an offence, if I parked behind it, "with a view (ie. intention) to denying the owner access to it"

If I parked there, merely because I wished to park on my own driveway, then I wouldn't be parking with a view to denying the owner access to it.

bazster

Excellent point! The relevant bit is actually this (my bold):

A person commits an offence who, without lawful authority—

(a)immobilises a motor vehicle by the attachment to the vehicle, or a part of it, of an immobilising device, or

(b)moves, or restricts the movement of, such a vehicle by any means,

intending to prevent or inhibit the removal of the vehicle by a person otherwise entitled to remove it.

So you can park on your driveway, so long as your intention is only to park on your driveway, not to block the other vehicle in! Well spotted! Although how someone can be entitled to remove a vehicle from your driveway when they would have to trespass in order to do so is beyond me...

trisontana

More information regarding the new appeals process:-

http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/london-councils-to-manage-private-parking-ticket-appeals-service/201222408

The new scheme comes into operation from October 1st and the expected £772,000 annual running costs will be met by the parking industry.

Patrick Troy, Chief Executive of the British Parking Association said: “The service represents a step-change in our drive to raise standards in our profession. Our members have long felt that such a service can only enhance the reputation of the sector and truly place the customer at the heart of our thinking.”
Parking on Private Land Appeals scheme will be based in London and appeals will be handled by post. The lead adjudicator will be barrister Henry Michael Greenslade.

LincolnshireYokel

Henry Michael Greenslade was called to the Bar of England and Wales in 1982 (Gray’s Inn). He is also a member of the Bar of Ireland (King’s Inns). In 1994 he was appointed a fee paid Parking Adjudicator to what was then the Parking Appeals Service and subsequently, as Traffic Adjudicator, to the Parking and Traffic Appeals Service. He has also sat as fee paid Adjudicator on the Road User Charging Tribunal and for the National Parking Adjudication Service.

I also note:
based on the assumption there will be 2.3million parking enforcement notices issued a year of which one per cent are appealed – the same proportion as on public roads.

23,000 appeals they're expecting then........I think we can ramp that up a bit.....

Also looks like they didnt swallow the 60,000-90,000 bollox peddled by the BPA.