White zig zag lines

D_P_Dance

This has nothing to do with the grape, or ladies in Holy Orders, MPs can influence planning committees they can write to ministers, they can contact Trading Standards, even raise these matters at PMQs.  

Uptown_Boy

D_P_Dance said:

This has nothing to do with the grape, or ladies in Holy Orders, MPs can influence planning committees they can write to ministers, they can contact Trading Standards, even raise these matters at PMQs.  

About a random member of the public taking a photo of a car on zig-zags?

Undervalued

Uptown_Boy said:

D_P_Dance said:

This has nothing to do with the grape, or ladies in Holy Orders, MPs can influence planning committees they can write to ministers, they can contact Trading Standards, even raise these matters at PMQs.  

About a random member of the public taking a photo of a car on zig-zags?

Quite.

The OP was in the wrong stopping on the ZigZags. The only defence is if they had no alternative in an emergency. Give that they were able to move the car when challenged rather suggests they did have an alternative.

Although some people don't like the type of behaviour exhibited by the lady taking the photographs, she was not doing anything unlawful.

unforeseen

Give that they were able to move the car when challenged rather suggests they did have an alternative.

No they stopped as a reaction to the red light on the dash which in most cases means stop immediately. 
Having done so they were then in a position to calmly assess the situation and in this case decided it was actually safe to move it to another location. 

Undervalued

unforeseen said:

Give that they were able to move the car when challenged rather suggests they did have an alternative.

No they stopped as a reaction to the red light on the dash which in most cases means stop immediately. 
Having done so they were then in a position to calmly assess the situation and in this case decided it was actually safe to move it to another location. 

So they say but they won't be able to prove that, whereas the photos will show them stopped on the zig zags.

In face, if you read the OP, they say.....

When I got out of the car while my engine was still running to have a quick look at the tyre I realised I was parked On a white zig zag line and went straight in my car.

Which is a further offence is it not?

Scrapit

Undervalued said:

unforeseen said:

Give that they were able to move the car when challenged rather suggests they did have an alternative.

No they stopped as a reaction to the red light on the dash which in most cases means stop immediately. 
Having done so they were then in a position to calmly assess the situation and in this case decided it was actually safe to move it to another location. 

So they say but they won't be able to prove that, whereas the photos will show them stopped on the zig zags.

In face, if you read the OP, they say.....

When I got out of the car while my engine was still running to have a quick look at the tyre I realised I was parked On a white zig zag line and went straight in my car.

Which is a further offence is it not?

One unlikely to be captured in a photograph.

roddydogs

Of course you had a puncture, lol

unforeseen

Undervalued said:

unforeseen said:

Give that they were able to move the car when challenged rather suggests they did have an alternative.

No they stopped as a reaction to the red light on the dash which in most cases means stop immediately. 
Having done so they were then in a position to calmly assess the situation and in this case decided it was actually safe to move it to another location. 

So they say but they won't be able to prove that, whereas the photos will show them stopped on the zig zags.

In face, if you read the OP, they say.....

When I got out of the car while my engine was still running to have a quick look at the tyre I realised I was parked On a white zig zag line and went straight in my car.

Which is a further offence is it not?

It's very difficult to investigate a weird noise from an engine if not running. 
Getting out while the engine running is part of the assessment of the problem. 

Do you really think that the police would take any action from one single picture from a busybody when confronted with a plausible story that provides FULL mitigation for the action of the driver?

TBH, the police response would probably be "oy Sarge, we got another photo from that busybody"
Legislation

The driver of a vehicle shall not cause the vehicle or any part of it to stop within the limits of a crossing unless he is prevented from proceeding by circumstances beyond his control or it is necessary for him to stop to avoid injury or damage to persons or property.

There's your get out. It doesn't say that it can't be your property. 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/2400/regulation/18/made