blocking driveway

unholyangel

Nearly_Old wrote: »

Quite and the actual boundary can be marked in numerous ways - fence, hedge, wooden posts at regular intervals, stone walls, etc. In 40 years of highway engineering I came across just about every variation in rural and urban areas.



However in this case it is highly likely that the boundary will be the back of the footway/verge and the end of the OP's drive. Therefore the OP's vehicle on the drive is not on the highway and does not have "free passage of the highway". To have free passage you need to be on the highway and not parked off the highway. The statute does not include obstructing access to the highway there could however be local bye-laws that cover this situation.

Do you have any source you can cite to back that up or is it just your personal opinion?

Lets look at the wording of wilful obstruction again:

(1)If a person, without lawful authority or excuse, in any way wilfully obstructs the free passage along a highway he is guilty of an offence

Note how the wording makes it an offence to obstruct free passage along the highway (which includes pavements) and not just the free passage of road users already on the highway.

Thats because what you're suggesting would be inane and would lead to situations where (for example) someone could obstruct the highway for cars & pedestrians alike and they won't have created an offence if the vehicle/person wasn't on the highway at the time they created the obstruction. There are many highways - its not just one big highway.


A highway is a right of way for all users. Not just those who are on it at a particular moment.

AndyMc.....

unholyangel wrote: »

Do you have any source you can cite to back that up or is it just your personal opinion?

Lets look at the wording of wilful obstruction again:



Note how the wording makes it an offence to obstruct free passage along the highway (which includes pavements) and not just the free passage of road users already on the highway.

Thats because what you're suggesting would be inane and would lead to situations where (for example) someone could obstruct the highway for cars & pedestrians alike and they won't have created an offence if the vehicle/person wasn't on the highway at the time they created the obstruction. There are many highways - its not just one big highway.


A highway is a right of way for all users. Not just those who are on it at a particular moment.

You do realise a road also includes pavements?

AndyMc.....

Nearly_Old wrote: »

Quite and the actual boundary can be marked in numerous ways - fence, hedge, wooden posts at regular intervals, stone walls, etc. In 40 years of highway engineering I came across just about every variation in rural and urban areas.



However in this case it is highly likely that the boundary will be the back of the footway/verge and the end of the OP's drive. Therefore the OP's vehicle on the drive is not on the highway and does not have "free passage of the highway". To have free passage you need to be on the highway and not parked off the highway. The statute does not include obstructing access to the highway there could however be local bye-laws that cover this situation.

By blocking access to the highway you are preventing free passage along it.

jlemaitre

Assuming said car that's SORN is a classic sports car/desirable car and its being blocked in and you've no intention of driving for the foreseeable future wouldn't you look at the inconsiderable person doing you a 'favour'?

I have 2 Hot hatches/sporty cars both SORN and my neighbour slightly blocks 1 of my car in. I'm quite happy about it to be honest as there's plenty of people out there that need their fingers chopping off. I've no intention of driving it any time soon so, Please carry on.


Try to look at it at a different angle, Would you rather have the car stolen while SORN or blocked in and it still being in your possession?

unholyangel

AndyMc..... wrote: »

You do realise a road also includes pavements?

Well obviously, thats why I phrased it as I did rather than saying motor vehicles or vehicles - because road users includes pedestrians.

ETA: You seem to have missed the distinction I was making - that its an offence not just to obstruct passage to road users currently on that highway, but also any road users who wish to use that highway.

nyermen

The tone of responses suggests we all think he owns the sorn'd car. It might be someone has dumped a car. OP can you clarify, your car is on your driveway, and another car (not yours) is in front blocking it. I would guess you've done a vehicle check and it says it's SORN'd?

As I understand - blocking is still blocking (an offense). What the police decide to do if it's not allowed on the road is more tricky, would they take it to a police impound?
Note - if your car is not blocked in on the driveway (the car was dumped while you're away), then I understand it's not an offense, just trespass (ie. civil).

AndyMc.....

unholyangel wrote: »

Well obviously, thats why I phrased it as I did rather than saying motor vehicles or vehicles - because road users includes pedestrians.

ETA: You seem to have missed the distinction I was making - that its an offence not just to obstruct passage to road users currently on that highway, but also any road users who wish to use that highway.

No, I didn’t miss it and said as much earlier.

CardinalWolsey

macman wrote: »

The SORN'd car can enter the public highway perfectly legally as long as it's on the back of a tow truck with all the wheels off the ground. So if you blocked a drive so as to prevent such a loading operation, you'd be causing an obstruction.

The SORN'd car isn't technically entering the highway in this scenario though, otherwise it would only be legal to have a SORN'd car on the back of a tow truck if the car was being taken to a pre-booked MOT test. Blocking the tow truck from reversing on to the drive to hoist the SORN'd car is not in itself an offence, however if the tow truck was on the drive hoisting the SORN'd car, and in the meantime somebody parked and blocked the driveway preventing the tow truck from leaving, that would be an offence.

unholyangel

AndyMc..... wrote: »

No, I didn’t miss it and said as much earlier.

If you didn't miss it, you wouldn't have responded in the belief I didn't know road users include those using pavements.

AndyMc.....

unholyangel wrote: »

If you didn't miss it, you wouldn't have responded in the belief I didn't know road users include those using pavements.

I didn’t say that.