I wonder what you WILL buy? - the same problem of tyre deflation afflicts Fords, Peugeot, Citroen, Renault and Fiat if the web is anything to go by !

February 2012 update - A bit late for this thread now - but Peugeot deny any knowledge of the tyre puncturing problem (apart from a small recall on the Partner in 2005) after my wife had a blow-out caused by a broken front spring in her 1007. I am aware the Citroen C3 has "spring catchers" available - but NOT Peugeot. This IS a safety issue. (the 1007 has the same chassis as the Citroen C3 and the Peugeot 207) see my page h t t p://tinyurl.com/6q4tmw5 as the story unfolds ! (remove the spaces) Jim

Thanks, Ting - of course, you are correct. What a tangled web that Statutory Instrument is ! As you say, you go round and round and end up - nowhere ! Reg 31 becomes a dead end as far as drwg 1018.1 is concerned. It would appear to me (in that it is not mentioned anywhere in relation to yellow lines), that no lighting is required to help identify double yellow lines. If anyone knows different, please let me know ! Many thanks for your time :) Regards from sfj642

Thanks freakyleaky - but this Instrument refers to signs - and of course signs are not required for double yellows. I suspect the fact that it says nothing about street lighting in the yellow lines legislation (that I can find anyway) means that street lighting is not relevant. Which begs the question - as there are no signs necessary for double-yellow lines - what if you inadvertently park on a double-yellow in the dark - is it valid and can it be enforced ? Regards from sfj642

Simple query about the legality of double yellows in areas where there is no street lighting. Is it legal to make an order for double yellow lines in an unlit area (and by unlit I mean rural with no street lights at all) ? Build-outs, crossings, sleeping policemen (and until recently 30mph speed limits) could not be applied unless there is street lighting - does this also apply to double yellows, which similarly might not be visible in the dark ? and no, I have no court cases pending and I am not trying to get out of paying any fines ! The Highway Authority want to paint double yellows along an unlit road in our area - no accident record or traffic flow problems, they just fancy doing it. But can double yellows be installed where there is no street lighting ? Regards from sfj642

The problem with our Council is that they got their sums so wrong they have nothing at all for any "luxuries" (if you can call a swimming pool a "luxury") - or should I say non-mandatory items. In fact they are insolvent. We did look at one of the local Swimming Pool operators taking it over, and that would have given Trust status and saved on the NNDR. BUT even though that would have been a considerable saving, the Council could not afford the subsidy they would still have needed to operate the pool. The main point I was making, however, was to question why all the derelict lidos and pools around the country are not being demolished immediately on closure in order to save on NNDR (Non-domestic rates) ? If they were paying NNDR then surely most Councils would seek to demolish them to save the NNDR - but this isn't happening. I'm not saying they should pull them all down, just questioning why we are apparently so different to everyone else in that our pool has to be demolished. Why do our ratepaying residents (not one of whom has ever raised any concerns about the cost on the rates) have to lose our £6million investment just because our council cannot manage its affairs ? Your explanation of NNDR is excellent, thank you - but if you, as an intelligent and inquiring person, were unaware of how NNDR worked then what chance have we of making anyone understand the ridiculousness of our situation ?

Our local council is forced to DEMOLISH our swimming pool and leisure centre because it can't afford to pay the NNDR. Please read on . . . . ! The pool was closed last year because the Council got its sums wrong - but that's another issue ! The pool is in excellent condition (just 15 years old) and is now boarded up. Although the pool is closed, and cannot be used, the Council still has to pay NNDR of £50,000 on it under new legislation that came into force on 1st April this year. To avoid this cost to the ratepayer they have decided to demolish the only public pool for 25 miles around - so we all have a 50 mile round trip for a swim ! This appears ridiculous to me - a £6million public leisure pool is being demolished solely to save the NNDR. Surely something must be wrong here ? There are many derelict Lidos around the country - if they had to pay NNDR on them surely they would have been bulldozed ? So how can it make sense for our modern Leisure Centre to be demolished due to the apparent iniquitous NNDR applied to it ? If anyone can explain this conundrum - many thanks

Many thanks to you all for your quick and helpful replies. Shows the expertise is available if you ask for it Again many thanks - sfj642 :-):-):-)

WOW! that's fantastic Green and Mean - just what I was looking for. Can you tell me where it came from, please ? Many thanks - sfj642 :-):-):-)

With respect I don't think that either making money from fines or forcing people to park in costly car-parks is a valid criteria for introducing yellow lines. The lines may have that effect of course - but surely there has to be some valid and legally supportable reason for introducing yellow lines ? - not just putting them down 'where they fancy' ? sfj642

Can anyone tell me what the criteria for laying down yellow lines is ? Can the Highway Authority put them wherever they please or do certain safety - congestion - improve traffic flow - accidents criteria exist ? Many thanks - our Highway Authority wants to put down lines on an isolated rural sea-front and I don't think they will meet any of the criteria above. Many thanks - sfj642