"Marked" bay

Thunderacer6

Guys I've had an idea and checked it out with the land registry.
It looks like the grass beyond the kerb which my front wheels were parked on doesn't belong to the owner of the car park, it is the grass verge that runs down the side of the main road which is usually owned by the council.
I assume this puts a whole new spin on the issue and I can claim the pcn is not valid as the ppc is not acting on behalf of the land owner???
Please advise.

Umkomaas

Thunderacer6 wrote: »

Guys I've had an idea and checked it out with the land registry.
It looks like the grass beyond the kerb which my front wheels were parked on doesn't belong to the owner of the car park, it is the grass verge that runs down the side of the main road which is usually owned by the council.
I assume this puts a whole new spin on the issue and I can claim the pcn is not valid as the ppc is not acting on behalf of the land owner???
Please advise.

Do you mean for the front end of the vehicle, the part on the grass, or the back end, positioned on the car park? Which landowner do you feel has primacy?

I’ve always mused as to whether any vehicle other than a car has any right to park without risk in a car park?

We’re already seeing some car parks where vehicles other than a car are required to pay additional charges. The more the noose tightens on PPCs via Greg Knight, the more they will seek to find alternative excuses for penalties.

Thunderacer6

Basically they say I'm not parked wholly in the marked bay because the front wheels are on the grass, the part of the land not controlled by them, the rest of the vehicle was contained wholly within the bay. So as the offending bit is on land that has no concern to them surely the pcn is not valid

Thunderacer6

Btw, the parking sign does not mention the word CAR anywhere on it, it says private parking and vehicles.