Car Covers

[hadenuf]

Morning,

Firstly, hello all - this is my first post - I have had a scoot round the FAQs on this topic, please redirect me if I have missed anything there.

I live in Brighton and I am fed up with the corruption of the parking regime here. I have been fined numerous times because of trivial bureaucratic infractions which are frankly unfair - the amount of money does irritate me intensely but it is systematic arrogance that really gets up my nose.

I think I have found a method of reversing this position, to show that silly buggers works both ways, and want to run it past you to highlight flaws/risks.

I sometimes use residents visitor permits as £1/day which is where the principle problem lies. In Brighton and Hove (B&H), a ticket for a residents permit bay has to be placed on the windscreen of the car to be valid. If the car is completely covered with a car cover this is not possible.

I have reviewed this scenario with the "parking enforcement team" at B&H, with them explaining their process:

- no permit visible - attempt issue of ticket
- cannot place ticket on screen because of cover, attemt to remove cover
- cannot remove cover beacuse of damage (such as breaking tie wraps), call police to remove cover
- B&H have said they only lift cars after 10 tickets issued (unless blocking highway)

I spoke to Sussex police who said they wouldn't come out to remove a car cover to allow B&H to issue a ticket but I may get hit with a "parking summons"

Does anyone know the likelyhood/experience of a "parking summons" or other issues I need to know about?

Cheers

[patdavies]

The major flaw in your plan is that under VERA, a motor vehicle on a public highway (unless an exempt vehicle) must display both VRM and VED. A cover over the vehicle prevents such display.

Failing to display these is a matter for the Police to deal with as a crinimal matter, and not within the remit of the decriminalised parking regime run by the Council.

As to the "parking summons" from the Police, I guess that this would be an FPN/summons for obstruction

[jampot]

Theoretically, you could have a perspex 'window' sewn into the cover, so the VED could be displayed. The cover doesn't have to cover the VRM - or you could simply affix legal plates over the top of the cover.

If there is a suggestion that the ticket is ONLY valid if it can be placed on the windscreen, then these 2 minor adjustments should be sufficient. However, I would suggest that, in order to write a ticket, they must be able to note the registration. With this covered, ticket writing is prevented (not service). I would imagine that, given the VRM has to be on show, they could issue the ticket anyway and serve it in person (if necesasry) or attach it to the cover in some way - since I find it more believable that it is the lack of visible VRM (in your original suggestion) which prevents the ticket from being issued, rather than a cast-iron requirement for it to be served onto the windscreen, and in no other way...

[patdavies]

It certainly doesn't have to be put on the windscreen.

The law is that it must be "affixed to the vehicle"; remenber that not all vehicles have windscreens. However, fixing it to any cover would not, IMHO, qualify as affixing to the vehicle; taping it to the exposed VRM would count though.

A further point regarding the use of a cover, if you are parking without lights (ie where this is lawful) then I seem to recall that the vehicle's reflectors must be showing.

[jampot]

If you displayed the VRM on the car cover, then I guess we enter a minefield. As the plates are not technically attached to the vehicle, then affixing a PCN to them would not (for me) qualify as service.

However, if they aren't attached the the vehicle, can we say for sure that the vehicle is properly displaying its VRM? If not, as patdavies says, an offence is committed right there.

A safer bet would be to sew a plastic 'window' into the car cover so that:

(i) VED
(ii) VRM
(iii) reflectors

are visible.

[hadenuf]

Thankyou for the responses so far.

I agree, it makes sense to leave the

(i) VED
(ii) VRM
(iii) reflectors

visible, as my issue is with B&H parking enforcement, not the police.

So, if these were in place - what options are left for the parking enforcement team?

I have had a ticket cancelled by B&H before as it was not placed on the windscreen -- this rule has been confirmed many times by B&H parking teams

Cheers

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

My honest opinion is that where you have a car cover and the VRM / VED etc are visible you can legitimately be served a PCN by post. I think it will be a good case to say that the PA was prevented from serving the PCN.

Just my thought!

[patdavies]

Originally Posted by hadenuf

I have had a ticket cancelled by B&H before as it was not placed on the windscreen -- this rule has been confirmed many times by B&H parking teams

I'm afraid that this is a rule that exists only in their own minds.

RTA 1992 s.66

(1) Where, in the case of a stationary vehicle in a designated parking place, a parking attendant has reason to believe that a penalty charge is payable with respect to the vehicle, he may—
(a) fix a penalty charge notice to the vehicle; or
(b) give such a notice to the person appearing to him to be in charge of the vehicle.

[green_and_mean]

The Council can also issue fixed penalty notices for obstructing the highway using the same laws as they use for skips and building materials. The tax by law has to be displayed and this contains the VRM making your daft idea pointless. And the previous advice is correct there is no requirement to place PCN on window of the car, how would you do this on a motorcycle?

[BADGER 69]

With my many years experience in the transport business I have understood that the tax disc has to be displayed in the bottom of the windscreen on the nearside of the vehicle except for motor cycles. I believe you can be fined for displaying it anywhere else. Some times you will see it displayed in the side window of lorries but this is accepted as it can be easily read from the pavement.

[patdavies]

Originally Posted by BADGER 69

With my many years experience in the transport business I have understood that the tax disc has to be displayed in the bottom of the windscreen on the nearside of the vehicle except for motor cycles. I believe you can be fined for displaying it anywhere else.

Not so. It only has to be displayed on the passenger side of the windscreen = nothing about the lower corner - although that has become custom.

The DirectGov site provides this information

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Originally Posted by patdavies

Not so. It only has to be displayed on the passenger side of the windscreen = nothing about the lower corner - although that has become custom.

The DirectGov site provides this information

Just to be ultra pedantic, it clarifies by saying "kerb side" so if you have a model of car that is only available in LHD form (say) you will need to put the tax disc on the driver's side.

[jampot]

But, it would be technically possible to display the VRM and VED (using perspex 'windows' in a car cover) - and the reflectors, too, if you want - yet have none of the 'vehicle' itself visible... and by 'visible', I mean presenting a surface which a PA could affix a ticket to. As the car cover is NOT a vehicle, affixing to that cannot be 'service'.

[green_and_mean]

Originally Posted by jampot

But, it would be technically possible to display the VRM and VED (using perspex 'windows' in a car cover) - and the reflectors, too, if you want - yet have none of the 'vehicle' itself visible... and by 'visible', I mean presenting a surface which a PA could affix a ticket to. As the car cover is NOT a vehicle, affixing to that cannot be 'service'.

If something such as a cover is 'attatched' to the vehicle technically it becomes a part of it making service possible. However the LLA 2000 provision for posting PCNs could be used as the cover is physically preventing the PA from issuing the PCN.

[patdavies]

Originally Posted by green_and_mean

If something such as a cover is 'attatched' to the vehicle technically it becomes a part of it making service possible. However the LLA 2000 provision for posting PCNs could be used as the cover is physically preventing the PA from issuing the PCN.

LLA2000 doesn't apply to Brighton (yet).

[jampot]

Originally Posted by green_and_mean

If something such as a cover is 'attatched' to the vehicle technically it becomes a part of it making service possible. However the LLA 2000 provision for posting PCNs could be used as the cover is physically preventing the PA from issuing the PCN.

I'm not sure I entirely agree. "Attached" has a specific meaning. By your definition, it would be OK to 'serve' a PCN by affixing it to a leaf or twig which is merely resting on the car.

Similarly, when I go to sleep at night, the duvet isn't 'attached' to me - it is touching, and is draped over, but it isn't 'attached'.

I absolutely agree that this is just splitting hairs, but the original question was purely theoretical...

[green_and_mean]

A twig is not attatched to the car its as you say resting on it where as the plan was to tie the cover securely making it a part of the vehicle. Your example is of no comparison the duvet becomes a part of the bed not a part of you, just as you getting in a car does not make you part of the vehicle.