Abandoned car on private land

Retrogamer

Wig wrote: »

What law -as the landowner- allows you to do this?

Laws are normally set to prevent or limit us doing certain things so i'd imagine a law preventing them from doing what was suggested would be more appropriate.

It would seem strange though that a landowner can't remove items that were left on their land without consent, after giving the owner appropriate notice to move them.

Wig

Johno100 wrote: »

There was a very similar situation posted on the Parking Ticket, Fines & Parking sub-forum a couple of days ago.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5140736

Particularly of note is reference to Section 55 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, which amends the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 regarding the removal of vehicles.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/section/55/enacted

Seems like it is back to the police.

Have you got a link to the Regulations? It is not necessarily the police who are the empowered authority

The amended S99 would be like this:

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

(1)The Secretary of State may by regulations make provision for the removal of vehicles which have been permitted to remain at rest—

(a)on a road or other land in contravention of any statutory prohibition or restriction, or

(b)on a road or other land in such a position or in such condition or in such circumstances as to cause obstruction to other persons using the road or land concerned or as to be likely to cause danger to such persons, or

(c)on a road, or other land, 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 or other land

(2)Regulations under this section—

(a)may provide, in the case of a vehicle which may be removed from a road, for the moving of the vehicle from one position on a road to another position on that or another road or on land other than a road;

(aa)may provide, in the case of a vehicle which may be removed from land other than a road, for the moving of the vehicle from one position on such land to another position on such land or on any road;

(b)may provide for repealing byelaws dealing with the same subject-matter as the regulations, and for suspending, while the regulations remain in force, any power of making such byelaws; F1 . . .

(c). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(3)Where it appears to an authority which (apart from this subsection” is empowered to remove a vehicle in pursuance of regulations under this section that the vehicle is on land [F2other than a road] which is occupied by any person, the authority shall give him notice in the prescribed manner that they propose to remove the vehicle in pursuance of the regulations, and shall not be entitled to remove it if he objects to the proposal in the prescribed manner and within the prescribed period.

(4)[F3Where in pursuance of regulations under this section an authority proposes to remove a vehicle which appears to the authority to be abandoned and in their opinion is in such a condition that it ought to be destroyed, then “except where they are empowered by the regulations to remove the vehicle from a road in a case falling within paragraph (a) or paragraph (b) of subsection (1) above” they shall, not less than the prescribed period before removing it, cause to be affixed to the vehicle a notice stating that they propose to remove it for destruction when that period expires.]

(5)In this section “vehicle” means any vehicle, whether or not it is in a fit state for use on roads, and includes any chassis or body, with or without wheels, appearing to have formed part of such a vehicle, and any load carried by, and anything attached to, such a vehicle.

[F4(6)For the purposes of this section, the suspension under section 13A or 49 of this Act of the use of a parking place is a restriction imposed under this Act.]

Para (aa) Seems only to allow the vehicle to be moved from one position on the land to any other position on the same land or to a road. Well they are not going to move it to a road so this appears to be badly worded legislation which means.... where the vehicle is not abandoned and is only causing obstruction or danger the vehicle cannot be removed from the land but only moved within the land. Unless the regulations say otherwise. Or having moved it to a road it can then be seized under other legislation.?

Subsection 3 mentions the right to object if the land is "occupied by any person" A designated parking space could be said to be land that is occupied. Does the car owner have a right to use the parking space (ordinarily) or is he not a resident and lives somewhere totally seperate? Again the regulations will give more detail -hopefully.

Subsection 4 does not explain what happens if after the notice is affixed the owner objects for example saying it is NOT abandoned. This might be explained further in the regulations.

The_Loan_Stranger

Disabled_Rights_For_Me wrote: »

If I am "tecnhnically" doing nothing wrong then I see it as there is no problem. Not for me anyway and we all have to do our best to do what is right for ourselves.


This forum is full of people who use technicalities to their own advantage to save themselves some money. If this car was moved then this would free up a space for my visitors and they could park properly.

My blue badge was provided as I see it to make things easier for me. If this helps my visitors and means that they don't have to pay to park on the road, where I can park for free, then this helps make things easier for me.


We do get dirty looks sometimes but they never say anything because I am disabled and this is why I go with them as if they take any photos to report me, then they will see I am with them.

Is the above not EXACTLY as you yourself are doing with your bagde? But it appears that you think what he is doing is far worse, simply because it inconviences yourself, well not even yourself as you have a parking space already.

Disabled_Rights_For_Me

The car owner is not authorised to park there. It is a visitors space and so solely for the use of visitors to the site. Residents do sometimes abuse the spaces by using them for their second or third cars but he is not a resident so it is not even that.

Disabled_Rights_For_Me

The_Loan_Stranger wrote: »

Is the above not EXACTLY as you yourself are doing with your bagde? But it appears that you think what he is doing is far worse, simply because it inconviences yourself, well not even yourself as you have a parking space already.

I am not the only one affected by him parking there. It is other people as well as they need to have visitors.

The_Loan_Stranger

Disabled_Rights_For_Me wrote: »

The car owner is not authorised to park there. It is a visitors space and so solely for the use of visitors to the site. Residents do sometimes abuse the spaces by using them for their second or third cars but he is not a resident so it is not even that.

My blue badge was provided as I see it to make things easier for me. If this helps my visitors and means that they don't have to pay to park on the road, where I can park for free, then this helps make things easier for me.


Surely what you are doing is just as bad as what he is doing, two wrongs don't make a right.

Wig

The_Loan_Stranger wrote: »

My blue badge was provided as I see it to make things easier for me. If this helps my visitors and means that they don't have to pay to park on the road, where I can park for free, then this helps make things easier for me.


Surely what you are doing is just as bad as what he is doing, two wrongs don't make a right.

What part of "the parking space is there for the use of visitors" don't you understand?

OP (Original Poster) just ignore this fool.

The_Loan_Stranger

Wig wrote: »

What part of "the parking space is there for the use of visitors" don't you understand?

OP (Original Poster) just ignore this fool.

Why do you feel the need to show your ignorance by calling me a fool?

All i am saying to the op (not YOU, but you choose to insult me anyway) is that surely if they are using their blue badge to save his friends/visitors from having to pay to park then that is an abuse of the blue badge system, just as the person with the car is abusing the parking space, i personaly know which one i feel is worse.

GabbaGabbaHey

Disabled_Rights_For_Me wrote: »

The council is actually very arrogant and say that "we won't touch it its private land". They also say that because the car is being used as storage, even though it has been there and not driven (it has one wheel missing and looks like he is using it for parts) for about 8 months, it is not abandoned as the keeper is using the car.

With the boot on the other foot, I would not be happy if my local council chose to spend my Council Tax to remove a non-abandoned vehicle from private land!

Surely it's a civil matter, and if the residents are unhappy with the situation, it's up to them (through the Management Committee) to launch civil proceedings against the registered keeper of the vehicle.

Wig

Ok I apologise for calling you a fool, you are right, I did show my ignorance because I thought you were saying something about the OP wanting to park in the visitors space with her blue badge.

I only insulted you because I am fed up with seeing posters on this forum having snide and stupid attacks on an OP rather than helping them. And I will step in and say so, because many OPs may be afraid to do so.

That all said and done. At least the OP is legally allowed to free up her space and park on the road so her visitors can park on her allocated space. I don't know the laws on blue badge parking so I don't know theoretically how long she could park on single/double yellows.