New tenant neighbours' behaviour

WIAWSNB

Section62 said:

WIAWSNB said:

If/when you get your dropped kerb, then also have a white line added to demarcate the entrance. If anyone breaches this, then you can take civil action against them - make sure you have solid LP on your house insurance, and this should be easy. You may even find that your LA would be willing to intervene, especailly if you can present evidence of repeated transgressions.

On what grounds?  The white line has no specific legal significance, and therefore cannot be 'breache[d]'. Assuming this is a (public) highway rather than a private road then a possible 'legal' route might be a private prosecution for highway obstruction, but I can't see any circumstances where an insurer's legal protection would be willing to take that on.

There's virtually zero chance of sucessfully prosecuting a highway obstruction offence if the offending vehicle is only slightly over the crossover.  The obstruction would need to be total, and with some consequence - for example the OP's car was blocked from leaving the driveway and as a result they missed a flight.

Even so, the action is more likely to be for damages (e.g. the cost of the missed holiday) rather than for the offence of highway obstruction.

I am not informed about how easy - or not - it would be to enforce, but it seemingly can come down to how proactive your council is in your area, and whether they take on CPE Civil Parking Enforcement. If they do, you should be on pretty solid ground; they can issue FPNs (and would presumably be quite happy to do so). If they don't, it's harder, and the police will only become involved if you are actually prevented from exiting your drive. But - either way - I presume you are not suggesting that someone can just get away with blocking your driveway, even partially - if it makes ingress/egress difficult? You just suck it up?

Having a white line will not only make any excuse for parking over the entrance harder for the miscreant to make, but should also act as unimpeachable evidence when CCTV'd, unlike the gradual sloping ends of a dropped kerb. 

So, you'll hopefully agree it's a good idea? 

The Highway Code is clear that obstructing a driveway (and parking on pavements) are driving offences. I think a white line will help.

UncleTomCobley

chrisw said:

FreeBear said:

A few calls to the local police station soon had traffic wardens out issuing parking tickets. After a week or two of ticketing, the problem disappeared. Parking on a pavement is an offence which can attract a Penalty Charge Notice. At £70 a time, it can quickly act as a deterrent. Parking in a dangerous location such as on a junction will attract the attention of the police, and they would likely issue another PCN as well as having "words".

Rather than trading notes, I'd suggest contacting the police and let them deal with it.

It's not illegal to park on pavements outside London. It may be an offence to cause an obstruction to the footpath but it doesn't sound as though this is the case here.

Not sure this is entirety correct https://roadsafety.scot/campaigns/pavement-parking/

Section62

WIAWSNB said:

I am not informed about how easy - or not - it would be to enforce, but it seemingly can come down to how proactive your council is in your area, and whether they take on CPE Civil Parking Enforcement. If they do, you should be on pretty solid ground; they can issue FPNs (and would presumably be quite happy to do so).

If the council is doing the enforcement they would issue a PCN, not a FPN, because the enforcement is decriminialised.  The council would also be enforcing a different contravention - parking where the kerb is lowered - rather than for obstruction.

As I outlined in my previous post - in some places councils are happy to issue PCNs for footway parking, but most have a policy of not enforcing certain streets because they know that footway parking has to be tolerated.  Some will issue warning notices instead of PCNs.  I've been a council representative in meetings with residents complaining about footway parking enforcement... not everyone thinks it is a good idea, and is a major cause of conflict between neighbours.

WIAWSNB said:

If they don't, it's harder, and the police will only become involved if you are actually prevented from exiting your drive. But - either way - I presume you are not suggesting that someone can just get away with blocking your driveway, even partially - if it makes ingress/egress difficult? You just suck it up?

In effect, yes.  What does 'difficult' mean anyway?  The police enforcement threshold (for highway obstruction) is usually where you can't get out of your driveway full stop.  If you can do it with a 20-point turn then it isn't obstruction.

WIAWSNB said:

Having a white line will not only make any excuse for parking over the entrance harder for the miscreant to make, but should also act as unimpeachable evidence when CCTV'd, unlike the gradual sloping ends of a dropped kerb. 

So, you'll hopefully agree it's a good idea?

There is extensive case law used by councils and the parking adjudicators to decide whether someone has parked in front of a dropped kerb.  The white line is superfluous for the purpose of enforcement.

The white line is a reminder to drivers, not something which is enforceable.  Given the 'miscreant' is the neighbour and knows exactly what they are doing, the OP spending money on a white line is probably a waste of time.

They need to get their driveway sorted out and then see what the neighbour does.  A white line might be helpful, but the OP will only know when the situation has developed further.

WIAWSNB said:

The Highway Code is clear that obstructing a driveway (and parking on pavements) are driving offences. I think a white line will help.

The Highway Code isn't law, and that^ isn't what it says anyway.  Rule 244 makes a distinction between London (and Scotland) which are "MUST NOT" (is law) for footway parking, and elsewhere "should not" (isn't law).

Pendrive

chrisw said:

It's not illegal to park on pavements outside London. It may be an offence to cause an obstruction to the footpath but it doesn't sound as though this is the case here.

I'm in the north west, not London or Scotland. There is an obstruction to the pavement - one either has to walk into the road around the car, or some go past by walking on my lawn to get past.

Pendrive

RavingMad said:

It's annoying but not much can be done, there's no law stopping them from parking there.

A pram or suchlike wouldn't get past as sister has a bush in the front garden. If anyone were so inclined, a PCSO could have words (as happened to me many years ago for parking at a friend's for a few hours merriment)

How often do you plan on jet washing your drive?
Be mindful not to spray anything hard that might mark their car. But a bit of muck would be fine 😁

It's indeed very annoying when they are practically next to the car park...

I was also visited by police many years ago - my then landlord said it would be fine to park on the pavement, and a neighbour called police the first night I was there! Those were the days...

I only jetwash the drive a couple of times a year, and hopefully the dropped kerb will be in place before the next time. I do jetwash bikes regularly though, as a fairly serious offroad cyclist; though use a fairly gentle washer. So hopefully there won't be issues again.

Pendrive

Section62 said:

Whether you live in the old Greater London Council area or not makes a huge difference to how to tackle this, and knowing this would help us to give you better advice.

However I would tread really carefully here - although (nearly) everybody agrees that parking on footways is antisocial and causes a danger for disabled and partially sighted people, as well as for people using pushchairs/prams, the reality is in some places if people don't park partially on the footway then the road gets blocked for larger vehicles.

The police and local authorities generally take a pragmatic view in dealing with footway parking - i.e. they usually ignore it unless someone complains (except in much of London where it is a cash-cow for councils).

If the police and councils took a stricter line, and also dealt with obstruction where people park on the carriageway on narrower road, then lots of people would have nowhere to park their car near their home, which in turn would be politically unacceptable.

So there's lots of unwritten understandings between residents, the police, and councils about which roads it is Ok to park partially on the footway along.

If your area is one of those where partial-footway parking is necessary for people to be able to park then you won't be thanked (by everyone) if you ask the police/council to take enforcement action.  "How would anyone know it was me?" could be the question - the answer to which might be that your neighbour (you are now getting into a dispute with) could let it be known to others that you have been complaining about (footway) parking so it was probably you that got on to the police/council.  Doesn't matter whether it is true or not, a rumour like that is difficult to counter.

Your "no interest anywhere in addressing it" point is simply because it is generally a no-win for either the police or the council.  If they don't enforce they get moaned at for endangering pedestrians, if they do enforce they get moaned at for persecuting residents (and money grabbing).

My own personal experience on the subject is it is a hornet's nest best left unkicked.

I'd echo chrisw's point that it isn't illegal to park on footways outside London (with a few exceptions) so reporting this to the police is unlikely to result in any action. If you are in London then it is a council matter, not one for the police.

WIAWSNB said:

If/when you get your dropped kerb, then also have a white line added to demarcate the entrance. If anyone breaches this, then you can take civil action against them - make sure you have solid LP on your house insurance, and this should be easy. You may even find that your LA would be willing to intervene, especailly if you can present evidence of repeated transgressions.

On what grounds?  The white line has no specific legal significance, and therefore cannot be 'breache[d]'. Assuming this is a (public) highway rather than a private road then a possible 'legal' route might be a private prosecution for highway obstruction, but I can't see any circumstances where an insurer's legal protection would be willing to take that on.

There's virtually zero chance of sucessfully prosecuting a highway obstruction offence if the offending vehicle is only slightly over the crossover.  The obstruction would need to be total, and with some consequence - for example the OP's car was blocked from leaving the driveway and as a result they missed a flight.

Even so, the action is more likely to be for damages (e.g. the cost of the missed holiday) rather than for the offence of highway obstruction.

Many thanks for this, Section62 - there are lots of interesting points here to consider.

I'm not in London, so rules there don't apply to me. The road I'm on is a public one.

I'll try and get contact details for the neighbour's landlord, and if the tenants started blocking my driveway rather than park on the car park they're so  close to I'd probably look in the first place at speaking to him - not sure his tenants unnecessarily creating a dispute with neighbours would be that great for him. I would guess there is also a clause in their tenancy agreement relating to behaviours impacting on neighbours, and landlords have some legal responsibility for their tenants' actions. So that would be the first route re. any drive-blocking. In the first instance I'm unlikely to do anything before the dropped kerb outcome.

WIAWSNB

Pendrive said:

I'll try and get contact details for the neighbour's landlord, and if the tenants started blocking my driveway rather than park on the car park they're so  close to I'd probably look in the first place at speaking to him - not sure his tenants unnecessarily creating a dispute with neighbours would be that great for him. I would guess there is also a clause in their tenancy agreement relating to behaviours impacting on neighbours, and landlords have some legal responsibility for their tenants' actions. So that would be the first route re. any drive-blocking. In the first instance I'm unlikely to do anything before the dropped kerb outcome.

A landlord isn't responsibile for their tenant's behaviour, but I believe you are correct in saying that most (all?) ASTs do contain clauses about not being anti-social.

I'd like to think that a LL would be prepared to make their displeasure known to their tenant should they be informed of genuinely poor behaviour in the 'hood, but it'll likely come down to the individual LL. And whether they'd actually act on this is more unlikely. But, in the current climate, assuming that the tenants are happy where they are, and would struggle to find an equivalent, it could be quite persuasive.

Obviously see how it goes before considering this.

Pendrive

WIAWSNB said:

A landlord isn't responsibile for their tenant's behaviour, but I believe you are correct in saying that most (all?) ASTs do contain clauses about not being anti-social.

I'd like to think that a LL would be prepared to make their displeasure known to their tenant should they be informed of genuinely poor behaviour in the 'hood, but it'll likely come down to the individual LL. And whether they'd actually act on this is more unlikely. But, in the current climate, assuming that the tenants are happy where they are, and would struggle to find an equivalent, it could be quite persuasive.

Obviously see how it goes before considering this.

Yes - I am going to see how things go. I'll wait things out in the first instance re. the dropped kerb planning application, and then having that work done if I have the go-ahead. And then see how things go. Approach to LL might be an option to try after that, if I can find contact details; and if there are problems.

Have really appreciated your detailed responses on the thread - many thanks - they have been so helpful :-)