Thread: Parking across empty driveways

It sounds as though you're not one of the people with his own drive.
Imagine that you were.
The time is 2:30am.
Your wife wakes you up telling you that her waters have just broken and the birth of your baby is imminent.
You jump out of bed and dress..... Your wife's case is already packed, so you both dash downstairs and get into the car. The hospital is five miles away, but there's not much traffic at this time of the morning.
Down to the end of your drive. Stop. Turn engine off..... There's a car parked across your drive, blocking you in. You don't recognise the car, because it belongs to a visitor to one of the neighbours.
They've all gone to a nightclub, by taxi. The keys to the car are in his pocket.
Now what do you do?
Have you ever delivered a baby?

The possible scenarios are endless.

But the top and bottom of it remains the same.
The owner of the house has a right of access in and out of his property.
Just because there is not a car on the drive doesn't alter that fact.
It might be in the garage, safe from car-thieves. Or the owner is out.... but he could be home at any time to suit himself.

The owner of the house has paid out his own money to have his drive surfaced. He has also paid the council to drop the kerb, again, out of his own pocket. Why should anyone deprive him of the enjoyment of his own drive and his own access?

There are in the area a good few houses which have driveways / dropped kerbs and are often away from them. As far as I can see, having a driveway which people avoid blocking is essentially the same thing as having a reserved parking spare on the road (since the gap for the driveway is usually just one parking space) and I don't see why that's fair

Surely everyone is entitled to access to their own driveway from the road, regardless of whether you think they use it or not. I'm confused how having clear access onto your own property can be deemed 'unfair'.

Even if a resident doesn't have a car or use their driveway, what if they have visitors or repairmen who need access? Or heaven forebid, an ambulance?

I think parking across driveways in use is illegal for obstruction to highway, in any case.

It doesn't have to be an actual obstruction, just a potential one. Again, note ambulance example.

86 Prohibition of parking at dropped footways etc.

(1) In a special enforcement area a vehicle must not be parked on the carriageway adjacent to a footway, cycle track or verge where—
(a) the footway, cycle track or verge has been lowered to meet the level of the carriageway for the purpose of—
(i) assisting pedestrians crossing the carriageway,
(ii) assisting cyclists entering or leaving the carriageway, or
(iii) assisting vehicles entering or leaving the carriageway across the footway, cycle track or verge; or
(b) the carriageway has, for a purpose within paragraph (a)(i) to (iii), been raised to meet the level of the footway, cycle track or verge.
This is subject to the following exceptions.
(2) The first exception is where the vehicle is parked wholly within a designated parking place or any other part of the carriageway where parking is specifically authorised.
A “designated parking place” means a parking place designated by order under section 6, 9, 32(1)(b) or 45 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (c. 27).

I read that as a contravention is committed if you park in front of a dropped kerb, unless there is a designated parking bay adjacent.

I hope I don't get a sarcastic answer like poor old Rooster did.

Originally Posted by dominicp

Well done for figuring that one out. I realise you're an established member here but this post was about the law not about your feelings. In any case using an example of somebody being blocked in is kind of silly since I said that wasn't an issue and is illegal in any case.

Established member, mate he is part of the team that brings you this forum and gives you a voice. I wouldnt take the sarcasm too far as he may have the IP banned.

From what you just put there I woudnt blame him.

Note that (1) I obviously don't condone parking across driveways where cars are on them,
So you DO condone parking across drives where there isn't a car on them? So if the owner goes to work, or parks his car in the garage, therefore there is no car on the drive, it's OK to park across the drive's entrance?

and (2) the dashed white lines representing the CPZ places continue through most of these driveways (no yellow lines are painted).
On most housing estates there are no lines, white or yellow) painted on the roads

I think parking across driveways in use is illegal for obstruction to highway, in any case.

There is nothing "silly" in the situation that I suggested. Emergencies and desperate situations can occur at any time of the day or night.

Oh for heaven's sake. This is really quite shocking: Rooster posted an overwhelmingly irrelevant example which I had specifically ruled out, and this entire thread is now filled with people taking a position on morality instead of the legal situation.

Given the number of people who post with the intention of getting off morally justified parking tickets through loopholes, this does really smack of hypocrisy.

For the garage example, again of course I wouldn't condone parking there because you'd have to entertain the possibility there was a car there, and again it would still be illegal. My principle stands and you haven't yet explained why my interpretation of the LAW is incorrect.

You say "On most housing estates there are no lines, white or yellow) painted on the roads" but in this example there are, so that really isn't relevant.

Originally Posted by Al27

I read that as a contravention is committed if you park in front of a dropped kerb, unless there is a designated parking bay adjacent.

Sure, but there is, because there is one long unbroken parking bay along the road.

I presumed from other posts that there were people on this forum with some legal knowledge. If nobody wants to offer a legal opinion then fine, I'll survive, but please can we stop with the personal attacks on my view of the scenario.

If this arguing continues then I would hope mods will just lock this thread.

I will leave this thread to run for a while.
Going to cast my vote...... provided nobody's parked across my drive.

Originally Posted by electron99

Heaven save us from armchair lawyers who google on the internet and think they have a new angle on the law missed by tens of thousands of lawyers over many years.

Dom your supposition is wrong on so many levels I am not going to waste time going through it. I suggest you take your research to a lawyer and ask him.

So you've taken a quotation out of context to make it look silly, and then just said you can't be bothered to explain your point anyway. This board really doesn't come across very well from this thread.

If you're so clever, why not look at the legislation I actually referenced and justify your opinion?

Yes A127 is probably suggesting a good idea.
Roosters drive is a no go -I heard he has his own cones

To take this on a little further.

It may not be classed as obstruction to block a driveway which is unoccupied. However, I declare to my insurance company that when at home, the vehicle is parked off road on a driveway. I have, before now, come home and found a vehicle parked across my drive, and have had to park on the highway as a result.

Should anything happen to my vehicle whilst it is parked on the highway outside of my house:

(1) would my insurance company try and decline any insurance claim on the grounds that it was parked in the vacinity of my home but not off road as I had declared (and received a discounted premium for) ?

(2) would I be able to reclaim any costs or damages off the registered keeper of the vehicle on the basis that by blocking my driveway I have been forced to partially invalidate sections of my insurance and have suffered financial loss because of it ?