Nightmare Neighbour parking dispute

gingercordial

Marija_1 said:

Tokmon said:

Marija_1 said:

Our houses are situated opposite a peculiar hazardous multi road junction, effectively used by other drivers as a roundabout, and my house is situated lower down. Whilst his unnecessary encroachment is annoying, it not only hinders my visibility further when entering onto the highway, but prevents me being able to use my (£7k) driveway for its intended purpose due to the hazard – i.e. to drive in, u-turn and be able to exit out again without having to reverse out and get smashed into.

Why would you want to waste time turning around on your driveway when you can simply reverse onto it and then drive out? 
This should be the standard way anyone parks on a driveway anyway.

Hi Marvel1 & Tokmon - the answer as to why I prefer not to reverse in is due to the high risk reason I stated: our houses are situated "opposite a peculiar hazardous multi-road junction..."
Your suggestion may apply to an average driveway situation, but we have a grassed triangular junction with no road markings on a sloping hill with my property being lower down than the neighbours, it has three blind bends round which vehicles drive at speed, and the junction's also used as a roundabout. 
It may be physically possible to reverse into the driveway, but it is extremely risky. 
To mitigate the risk the simplest solution was to extend my driveway to enable me to enter, manoeuvre, and drive out safely. I previously stated 'U-turn', but 3-point turn would be more accurate.

Even if we leave the hazardous location aside, as a property owner I thought I had the right to utilise and access my own driveway  without interference from an obnoxious neighbour who unnecessarily parks his vehicle causing an obstruction when he has ample space both on his own property, and in front of his own property. It transpires I may be wrong and who ultimately determines how one accesses, uses, parks or exits from one's driveway is not the actual property owner or resident, but someone else if they choose to interfere. 

I'm struggling to visualise how your neighbour's parking stops you doing what you need to do.  If you had room before this to drive on, do a three point turn within the confines of your (extended) drive, then drive off again, why does him partially overhanging your dropped kerb stop that?  Or did you still need to encroach onto the pavement/edge of the road in order to complete the turn manoeuvre?

Maybe a photo or diagram would help.

But as to your question: if you still have room to exit via some of your dropped kerb, ie he has not completely blocked your exit to the highway, the police will not get involved.  Trying any kind of court action will just be a waste of money I'm afraid.

leonj

Buy an old banger and park it over his dropped kerb, he might get the message

Marija_1

Tokmon said:

So using that logic the neighbors car must be almost completely destroyed by now by parking on the road right by your driveway by all the cars crashing into it due to the high risk.... but i assume that's not the case.
Reversing into a driveway simply involves stopping just past it and reversing in. It takes no more than 10 seconds longer to reverse in than go in forwards and you will be reversing towards your neighbors car that is parked there so little risk of someone crashing in behind you.
I really think your exaggerating the risk of reversing when it is only slightly more risky than going in forwards.

 

I’m glad everything in your world seems so simple, but your points frankly amount to assertions based on assumptions of a location and risks of which you have little to no knowledge. You’re attributing ‘logic’ to my statements, which are not my statements, and in suggesting exaggeration on my part, you yourself exaggerate. In addition to pontificating as to the standard way a vehicle driver should access their driveway, you not only advise as to the timescale in which the manoeuvre should be completed, but also provide a damage risk assessment…

My neighbour’s parked vehicles have actually been hit several times, usually when vehicles have slowed down to negotiate around the junction, at low to medium impact. His vehicles are not situated fully in the road as they’re part pavement-mounted.

If I was to stop, even briefly beside his parked vehicle in order to reverse I would be fully in the road way with traffic that can approach at speed from around three blind bends positioned in the roadway, not travelling part-road part-pavement, but travelling on the road itself. Whilst I’m sorry it may disagree with your reverse parking stopwatch expertise, but having to negotiate firstly around his vehicle, turning so as not to clip my front wheel on the island junction kerb, scanning the three approaches for traffic, before ensuring I don’t clip my own fence etc… may take me a few seconds more…

And then your collision damage expertise assures there is little risk of someone crashing into me…

Having worked in risk myself for over two decades I have to admit your conclusions are some of the most ridiculous, although I’m not so sure you’re actually being serious.

Gave me a few chuckles though. Reminds me of Blackadder’s The Blue Stone of Galverston.

https://youtu.be/kHWF50pXkEw

Marija_1

leonj said:

Buy an old banger and park it over his dropped kerb, he might get the message

Yeah thought of that, but cost etc..as it would need taxing/insuring/MOT... it becomes a silly tit for tat thing then as soon as one moves their vehicle the other moves theirs there. Again, his are almost permanently parked there. 
What I may have to do is not use my driveway and just park behind his car. 

Tokmon

Marija_1 said:

Tokmon said:

So using that logic the neighbors car must be almost completely destroyed by now by parking on the road right by your driveway by all the cars crashing into it due to the high risk.... but i assume that's not the case.
Reversing into a driveway simply involves stopping just past it and reversing in. It takes no more than 10 seconds longer to reverse in than go in forwards and you will be reversing towards your neighbors car that is parked there so little risk of someone crashing in behind you.
I really think your exaggerating the risk of reversing when it is only slightly more risky than going in forwards.

 

I’m glad everything in your world seems so simple, but your points frankly amount to assertions based on assumptions of a location and risks of which you have little to no knowledge. You’re attributing ‘logic’ to my statements, which are not my statements, and in suggesting exaggeration on my part, you yourself exaggerate. In addition to pontificating as to the standard way a vehicle driver should access their driveway, you not only advise as to the timescale in which the manoeuvre should be completed, but also provide a damage risk assessment…

My neighbour’s parked vehicles have actually been hit several times, usually when vehicles have slowed down to negotiate around the junction, at low to medium impact. His vehicles are not situated fully in the road as they’re part pavement-mounted.

If I was to stop, even briefly beside his parked vehicle in order to reverse I would be fully in the road way with traffic that can approach at speed from around three blind bends positioned in the roadway, not travelling part-road part-pavement, but travelling on the road itself. Whilst I’m sorry it may disagree with your reverse parking stopwatch expertise, but having to negotiate firstly around his vehicle, turning so as not to clip my front wheel on the island junction kerb, scanning the three approaches for traffic, before ensuring I don’t clip my own fence etc… may take me a few seconds more…

And then your collision damage expertise assures there is little risk of someone crashing into me…

Having worked in risk myself for over two decades I have to admit your conclusions are some of the most ridiculous, although I’m not so sure you’re actually being serious.

Gave me a few chuckles though. Reminds me of Blackadder’s The Blue Stone of Galverston.

Ok so if the situation is as hazardous as you describe and it's far too dangerous to reverse in, you are unable to drive in and do a "u-turn" because his car is in the way and you can't be reversing out because that would be even more risky than reversing in. Then how exactly are you getting your car in and out of your driveway? 

Marija_1 said:

but prevents me being able to use my (£7k) driveway for its intended purpose due to the hazard – i.e. to drive in, u-turn and be able to exit out again without having to reverse out and get smashed into.

Marija_1

gingercordial said:

Marija_1 said:

Tokmon said:

Marija_1 said:

Our houses are situated opposite a peculiar hazardous multi road junction, effectively used by other drivers as a roundabout, and my house is situated lower down. Whilst his unnecessary encroachment is annoying, it not only hinders my visibility further when entering onto the highway, but prevents me being able to use my (£7k) driveway for its intended purpose due to the hazard – i.e. to drive in, u-turn and be able to exit out again without having to reverse out and get smashed into.

Why would you want to waste time turning around on your driveway when you can simply reverse onto it and then drive out? 
This should be the standard way anyone parks on a driveway anyway.

Hi Marvel1 & Tokmon - the answer as to why I prefer not to reverse in is due to the high risk reason I stated: our houses are situated "opposite a peculiar hazardous multi-road junction..."
Your suggestion may apply to an average driveway situation, but we have a grassed triangular junction with no road markings on a sloping hill with my property being lower down than the neighbours, it has three blind bends round which vehicles drive at speed, and the junction's also used as a roundabout. 
It may be physically possible to reverse into the driveway, but it is extremely risky. 
To mitigate the risk the simplest solution was to extend my driveway to enable me to enter, manoeuvre, and drive out safely. I previously stated 'U-turn', but 3-point turn would be more accurate.

Even if we leave the hazardous location aside, as a property owner I thought I had the right to utilise and access my own driveway  without interference from an obnoxious neighbour who unnecessarily parks his vehicle causing an obstruction when he has ample space both on his own property, and in front of his own property. It transpires I may be wrong and who ultimately determines how one accesses, uses, parks or exits from one's driveway is not the actual property owner or resident, but someone else if they choose to interfere. 

I'm struggling to visualise how your neighbour's parking stops you doing what you need to do.  If you had room before this to drive on, do a three point turn within the confines of your (extended) drive, then drive off again, why does him partially overhanging your dropped kerb stop that?  Or did you still need to encroach onto the pavement/edge of the road in order to complete the turn manoeuvre?

Maybe a photo or diagram would help.

But as to your question: if you still have room to exit via some of your dropped kerb, ie he has not completely blocked your exit to the highway, the police will not get involved.  Trying any kind of court action will just be a waste of money I'm afraid.

Hi gingercordial, 
My driveway has two entrances/exits separated by a fence. Centrally situated behind the fence is a planterbox with flowers. So one entrance is usually clear. The other is essentially blocked by the neighbour's vehicle. Due to the aforementioned hazard, I'd like to drive in, turn the vehicle around and face out the other entrance/exit. But it seems the mere suggestion of this appears unacceptable to a few posters :-)

RAS

A photo would explain what is still unclear

caprikid1

The actions you mention to the rear of your property suggest a boundary dispute at the rear ?

Titus_Wadd

I sympathise with OP's parking and neighbour problem; but please don't dump a jalopy to make a point if you are in anyway likely to seek injunctive remedy in the future.  It's best to keep your hands clean and dwell on the moral high-ground (though it's not always easy). 

In my experience- NFH blocking half my drive for 8+ months; threats of violence and criminal damage and the police doing the square root of FA when the NFH broke into my home it seems my best bet is civil action for breach of covenants and nuisance and injunction to stop the noise nuisance caused by the twerp's covenant-breaking business activity.  The £ remedy might not be what you actually want, if more courteous parking is; our barrister advised we quantify our loss (which we can do) to claim damages. 

If you have legal cover with your house insurance, union membership etc use it for advice and a couple of cease & desist letters if they agree you have a case.  Paid for from your own pocket will cost a couple of £K and still might be ignored.  I hope you can achieve a bit of peace OP; it's stressful having this kind of irritation picking at your quiet enjoyment of your house.

Marija_1

Hi RAS:

 I don't think there's anything left unclear now - I ideally wished to enter and exit my driveway via one entrance and exit via another due to the hazard location. I can't do this as a neighbour effectively blocks one of the entrances preventing me from doing what I intended. That has left me restricted in only being able to drive (or reverse) into my driveway and exit via the same entrance, or park behind his vehicle on the pavement/street. It seems I can't do anything about it legally, so this won't form part of any nuisance complaint I may make against the neighbour for other issues I've experienced from him and I'll have to consider alternative options as discussed.

Thanks again for all your opinions on this, really appreciate it.