Jump to content


Can I challenge over double yellows?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5810 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Situation:

 

I live close to the junction of my street and a busy B road. (I am the 2nd house from the end in a row of victorian terraced houses).

 

Behind the houses on the other side is a car park that is always full with residents from the other side of the road, and surrounding streets cars.

 

Outside my house are double yellow lines whcih extend from the junction to halfway past the 3rd terraced house. The yellow lines on the opposite side run approx 2.5 meters longer.

 

The lines used to be shorter but when they were doing some work on the B road they lengthened them to stop people parking near the junction, however these lines were never reduced.

 

Now, in the past 3-4 years a lot of new people have moved onto the street, and unlike the people who left, almost all have cars.

 

There is now simply no more room to park.

 

I have on numerous occasions had to park 2-3 streets away from my house, which I'd rather not do with the local scally's hanging around.

 

At the other end of the street, the junction with another very busy B road that has waggons running up and down it all day from the local distribution centres has one of those silly mini roundabouts, but, there are no yellow lines to be seen. they extend just 1 foot beyond the junction onto our street.

 

I want to write to the council to see if it would be possible to reduce the length of the lines in front of my house. Possibly with the ideal length being from the junction to the end of the first house- so about 2.5 meters from the junction.

 

Is there anything i should state to the council as to why the lines should be reduced. Is there any sort of evidence from previous cases I could use. Could I use the example of the opposite end of the street as evidence?

 

Any help appreciated.

GE Money S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued 21/11/06. Responded 01/12/06. Prelim sent 05/12/06 £406. Response 12/12/06- **SETTLED IN FULL** (£396)

HSBC S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) issued 05/12/06. NO charges in last 6 years.

Lowell CCA issued 21/11/06. Further reminder sent 8/12/06. Now commited criminal offence no response.

Capital One S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 08/12/06 Responded 03/01/07-Prelim Sent 16/01/07. LBA issued 06/02/07- N1 served 07/03/07- acknowledged 14/03/07.

Scotcall CCA issued 16/01/07. Criminal offence committed.

HFC Prelim sent 16/01/07. LBA sent- Final Correspondance issued with time limit of 29/03/07.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Council are unlikely to be receptive to a single request to change the lines since its not just a case of painting out the bit you don't like. Any change to the Traffic Regulation Order would require a review of areas restrictions, parking and traffic flow followed by consulting the public over any changes. The best bet would be to get a few other names from your street to add weight to your request and then contact a friendly Councillor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to request a copy of the Traffic Regulation Order that refers to the yellow lines, so when writing to your council you need to be very specific on your request. There is usually a TRO which lists the length of the yellow lines, whether they are single or double and the enforceable periods.

 

Then you need to measure them accurately. If the lines are either longer or shorter that what is stipulated in the TRO technically you win because they should be EXACTLY as described in the TRO.

 

Good luck and if you have had a parking ticket, appeal anyway, there may be another reason for it being invalid.

 

The yellow lines must be accompanied by a post stipulating the enforceable periods. You could also measure the post and photograph and send in details as unless you have both the post and the lines, they are NOT ENFORCEABLE (unless regulations have recently changed)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck and if you have had a parking ticket, appeal anyway, there may be another reason for it being invalid.

 

The yellow lines must be accompanied by a post stipulating the enforceable periods. You could also measure the post and photograph and send in details as unless you have both the post and the lines, they are NOT ENFORCEABLE (unless regulations have recently changed)

 

I think the whole point of the OPs post was that he didn't want to get a ticket! ;)

Whatever the TRO says its preferable to get the problem solved rather than have to worry about getting PCNs and then appealing.

 

ps. DYL do NOT need any signage other than the lines themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

we will find out when he checks the TRO - many councils are remiss despite the clear the legislation. always worth checking the TRO.

 

My point is....I have yet to meet a PA who carries around a copy of each TRO so there is a good chance even if they are too long he will get a PCN, something he is trying to avoid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The yellow lines must be accompanied by a post stipulating the enforceable periods. You could also measure the post and photograph and send in details as unless you have both the post and the lines, they are NOT ENFORCEABLE (unless regulations have recently changed)

 

Incorrect.

 

DYL (as G&M has stated above) never need any signs on posts; SYL within a controlled parking zone do not need any signs either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is....I have yet to meet a PA who carries around a copy of each TRO so there is a good chance even if they are too long he will get a PCN, something he is trying to avoid.

G&M - the OP is trying to avoid valid enforceable PCNs - not confetti dished out from the council.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to request a copy of the Traffic Regulation Order that refers to the yellow lines, so when writing to your council you need to be very specific on your request. There is usually a TRO which lists the length of the yellow lines, whether they are single or double and the enforceable periods.

 

Then you need to measure them accurately. If the lines are either longer or shorter that what is stipulated in the TRO technically you win because they should be EXACTLY as described in the TRO.

 

 

True, but watch out for the favourite trick of "lines from the junction with xyz for a distance of abc metres or thereby" Usually used because the guys who paint lines aren't the sharpest tools in the shed. :)

 

Obviously if they're five metres longer then the TRO than you would probably have grounds for an appeal, but if they're 500mm over, probably not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone correct me if i'm wrong, but i'm sure it's an offence to park within 10 metres of a road junction ?

 

OK, you're wrong

 

I know plenty of places where parking bays are marked out within 10M of a junction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats the exception Pat. "“DO NOT park your vehicle or trailer on the road where it would endanger, inconvenience or obstruct pedestrians or other road users, For example do not stop…Opposite or within 10 metres (32 feet) of a junction, except in an authorised parking space...”"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats the exception Pat. "“DO NOT park your vehicle or trailer on the road where it would endanger, inconvenience or obstruct pedestrians or other road users, For example do not stop…Opposite or within 10 metres (32 feet) of a junction, except in an authorised parking space...”"

 

This is presumably from the Highway Code.

 

DO NOT is advisory; legal prohibition is signified in the HC by MUST NOT.

 

The original post thought that it was an offence (ie legally prohibited)

Link to post
Share on other sites

G&M - the OP is trying to avoid valid enforceable PCNs - not confetti dished out from the council.

 

Sorry I didn't realise you knew the OP and had an insight into his needs maybe next time you could post for him and make it clearer. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I didn't realise you knew the OP and had an insight into his needs maybe next time you could post for him and make it clearer. :rolleyes:

 

what ? The point is valid for all council PCNs hence the highlighting of valid enforceable.

It is the usual issues that are required for the PCN to have both those attributes.

 

1) the PCN - may be non complaint and so unenforceable. many are

 

2)The signs, bays or lines - many are not as in the TSRGD and so unenforceable.

 

3) The Traffic Regulation Order. these are often wrong/lost/never existed. this invalidating the restrictions.

 

4)The parking - may not have been as alledged, this is also often found to be the case, result is the ticket is duff.

 

Am pretty sure you know these things from the contents of your other. posts.

 

despite not understanding the point of your comment I do agree that making it clearer is always a good idea. for everyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

what ? The point is valid for all council PCNs hence the highlighting of valid enforceable.

It is the usual issues that are required for the PCN to have both those attributes.

 

1) the PCN - may be non complaint and so unenforceable. many are

 

2)The signs, bays or lines - many are not as in the TSRGD and so unenforceable.

 

3) The Traffic Regulation Order. these are often wrong/lost/never existed. this invalidating the restrictions.

 

4)The parking - may not have been as alledged, this is also often found to be the case, result is the ticket is duff.

 

Am pretty sure you know these things from the contents of your other. posts.

 

despite not understanding the point of your comment I do agree that making it clearer is always a good idea. for everyone.

 

I am fully aware of the law as you know, the point I am making is that the OP didn't even mention PCNs. He was asking how to get the lines removed so he could park legally and probably without upsetting his neighbours. Whether the TRO is correct or not is very unlikely to prevent him from getting a PCN, the fact that he would have to pay it or not is another matter. Believe it or not some people DO have better things to do than spend their free time appealing against PCNs. It can take at least 4 weeks to get to appeal stage and no sane person would welcome the prospect of dozens of PCNs and possibly hundreds of £s in fines hanging over their head regardless of how confident they may win their case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

say the TRO is wrong - all he needs to do in invalidate the first one via appeal and then quote the decision for the rest.

You example of lots and lots of tickets is misleading in the extreme. this is one location we are talking about not a collection from many places requiring many different appeals.

all moot unless he checks the TRO. these are public documents and there is plenty of legislation that makes them available. and appeals aren't that tough - though many councils withdraw from them at the final minute for some reason....

Link to post
Share on other sites

say the TRO is wrong - all he needs to do in invalidate the first one via appeal and then quote the decision for the rest.

You example of lots and lots of tickets is misleading in the extreme. this is one location we are talking about not a collection from many places requiring many different appeals.

all moot unless he checks the TRO. these are public documents and there is plenty of legislation that makes them available. and appeals aren't that tough - though many councils withdraw from them at the final minute for some reason....

 

One PCN a day for a month is £3000 gambled on a TRO being wrong, what happens if the OP does not understand it or incorrectly interpretes it. You can keep going on about this for months but at the end of the day only a fool would actually choose the option of getting PCNs and going thru the inconvenience of appealing over the option of parking in a street with no risk of getting a PCN every night.

Link to post
Share on other sites

gamble - you don't gamble. you get the TRO and check it. where is the gamble ? are you suggesting the adjudicator would ignore an failed TRO ? have you knowledge of them doing this ?

 

Do you even bother to read my posts or maybe you don't understand English!!?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...