When is a vehicle over 2.2m not a vehicle over 2.2m

Steve2k

Here's a quick question for you - let's assume you arrive at a car park in a car with kayaks strapped on the roof that makes you 2.3m high.

There is a barrier at the entrance to the car park and a sign saying "no vehicles over 2.2m" . Next to it there are parking spaces saying "vehicles over 2.2m only".

What do you do:
A: Park in the vehicles over 2.2m space.
B: stop in front of the barrier, take everything off the roof, drive under the barrier, put it all back on again and park. Then do the same when you leave.

If you answered A then you owe Gosport Council £65.

I did this and got a PCN.

I can not formally appeal or take it to an independent tribunal as they run parking as a criminalised system, so my only option if I want to take this further is to defend this in the Magistrates Court.

They say the reason I am in the wrong is because their definition of "vehicle" does not include things on your roof. I should have removed them.and then gone under the barrier if I'd wanted to park.

My wife is worried that a Magistrates Court will cost us a fortune.

Does anyone have experience of Magistrates Court, and if so, how much common sense gets applied?

May thanks,
Steve

AndyMc.....

Given it's not a criminal offence why should it go to Magistrates Court?

sevenhills

Steve2k wrote: »

If you answered A then you owe Gosport Council £65.

I did this and got a PCN.

Did the officer giving the fine have a tape measure? Photographic evidence with the tape measure?


Surely your evidence is that you drove under the barrier, going in and coming out.

unforeseen

sevenhills wrote: »

Did the officer giving the fine have a tape measure? Photographic evidence with the tape measure?


Surely your evidence is that you drove under the barrier, going in and coming out.

I'm guessing the parking spaces for over 2.2M are before the height barrier. No tape measure needed. Vehicle heights can be found on line

Or is they idea that you claim that the car was in a different part of the car park? Wouldn't go well in front of a magistrate if they produce evidence to the contrary.

unforeseen

AndyMc..... wrote: »

Given it's not a criminal offence why should it go to Magistrates Court?

It IS criminalised.

photome

I would have taken them off the roof and then parked ( or were you not using the kayaks and parked with them left on the roof). it sucks but its obvious your vehicle is not over 2.2m.


however post in the parking thread and on pepipoo for better advice

Car_54

unforeseen wrote: »

It IS criminalised.

So with what offence will you be charged?

marlot

Steve2k wrote: »

Here's a quick question for you - let's assume you arrive at a car park in a car with kayaks strapped on the roof that makes you 2.3m high. ...
What do you do:
A: Park in the vehicles over 2.2m space.
B: stop in front of the barrier, take everything off the roof, drive under the barrier, put it all back on again and park. Then do the same when you leave.
...

A has to be to only logical answer.


I'd let it go to court.

Tigsteroonie

After you parked, did you remove the kayaks? If you did, I can see why they are saying you parked a sub-2.2m car in an over-2.2m space - at the time they saw the vehicle, it contravened their regulations. As to what you should have done ... maybe anticipate this problem, removing the kayaks and then driving under the barrier? Not sure how practical that is though, especially if it was a multi-storey carpark so could have taken the driver a fair time to get back down to the entrance.

If you didn't remove the kayaks, I'd fight this as there was no way you could pass under the barrier safely. You shouldn't be expected to remove the kayaks and then put them back, certainly nobody with a roof-box on their car would be expected to do so.

Norman_Castle

They say the reason I am in the wrong is because their definition of "vehicle" does not include things on your roof. I should have removed them.and then gone under the barrier if I'd wanted to park.

Weak excuse for fining someone who has done what they think is correct. Are you supposed to block the entrance while removing and replacing whatever is on the roof?

Does it benefit you or anyone else by parking in the over 2.2m area?


Common sense suggests fixed luggage should be included in the height for short term parking as its impractical to remove it. I suspect a court would question why there is no independent process for dealing with this. If you take it to court apologise and explain you had no other option.


Try contacting the local councillor about their unworkable system.

neilmcl

Steve2k wrote: »

I can not formally appeal or take it to an independent tribunal as they run parking as a criminalised system, so my only option if I want to take this further is to defend this in the Magistrates Court.

What exactly is this supposed to mean?

Instructions for appealing are on the following page - https://parking.gosport.gov.uk/pages/OnlineChallengeEntry.aspx

BTW, we have a specific parking sub-forum which you should post in and as this is a council PCN it may well be worth going to the forums on https://www.pepipoo.com