Gants Hill residents fed up of ‘stupid’ fines for cars parked on drives

Aylesbury_Duck

trinidadone wrote: »

We must be seeing two different pictures then. I see a row of cars parked on driveways infront of residents street doors, with very short drive ways. I guess you see different, so we will agree to disagree.

No. Same picture. I see cars overhanging the pavement. The driveways aren't short. To use your own words, the drives were fine for many years. What's happened is that people have chosen to buy longer cars which can no longer be parked legally on those driveways. That's their problem.

Aylesbury_Duck

trinidadone wrote: »

your speeding is unrelated to the residents parked on this street.

You're correct. I was making an analogy.

Johno100

Hong_Kong_Phooey. wrote: »

So what's your point?

You have no rights to a parking space outside your house and if their cars don't fit on their drives they need to find an alternative solution.

Or the authorities could take a pragmatic common sense approach and let sleeping dogs lie.

Hong_Kong_Phooey.

Johno100 wrote: »

Or the authorities could take a pragmatic common sense approach and let sleeping dogs lie.

And where do you draw the line in deciding which offences you ignore?

Johno100

Hong_Kong_Phooey. wrote: »

And where do you draw the line in deciding which offences you ignore?

Easy, like the rest of the country outside Greater London, if no obstruction is being caused by pavement parking then take no action.

Aylesbury_Duck

Johno100 wrote: »

Or the authorities could take a pragmatic common sense approach and let sleeping dogs lie.

Which is what I expect will happen, but one of the common complaints on this forum is that there seems to be minimal enforcement of parking and traffic laws and rules. Here we have a council who are enforcing the rules and locals are complaining. Admittedly it seems overzealous and rather sudden, but this is also the council reminding residents that they are technically in the wrong. Land-grabbing and appropriation of public space goes on all the time and most people take a dim view of it, but these residents seem to think it's ok because it's not their fault that their cars don't fit on their drives. But it is their fault. If I were to park my car on the street so that a few inches of my boot overhung a resident's dropped kerb, they'd soon be complaining.

trinidadone

Johno100 wrote: »

Or the authorities could take a pragmatic common sense approach and let sleeping dogs lie.

I would say the local authority has taken this approach for years now, and has seen the challenges residents face with their parking. Its clear by the pictures, the parking of the residents affects no one, other than revenue generating.

You can see the penalty charge notices makes no difference, because the drivers can not go anywhere else, due to the parking restrictions on the street.

We all agree rules should be applied for all, but common sense should also prevail.

Hong_Kong_Phooey.

trinidadone wrote: »

I would say the local authority has taken this approach for years now, and has seen the challenges residents face with their parking. Its clear by the pictures, the parking of the residents affects no one, other than revenue generating.

You can see the penalty charge notices makes no difference, because the drivers can not go anywhere else, due to the parking restrictions on the street.

We all agree rules should be applied for all, but common sense should also prevail.

Yes they can.

Aylesbury_Duck

Hong_Kong_Phooey. wrote: »

Yes they can.

Or they could buy cars they can park properly. I can't fit a Mondeo estate in my garage, so I haven't bought one.

nicechap

Stoke wrote: »

Not necessarily. Owning one large people carrier might be necessary for a family with 4 kids, but might be too large for the drive.

Except that a large people carrier (like the previa you can see on street view) would fit on their property if they parked it parallel instead of at 90 degrees.