Parking On Private Garage Entry

[hamish72]

I own a lock up garage it being 1 in a block of 4 the forecourt or drive to it is about 20 feet long and the width of said garage.

 

Owing to its position close to the school and near the main road in the village inconsiderate persons frequently park on the forecourt completely blocking entry to or egress from the garage.

 

Recently after waiting over an hour I contacted the police who attended very quickly but took 4 hours to locate the owner of the offending car.

 

The police informed me that had the car been parked on public property as in highway they could have and would have removed but as it was on private property they could not help other then locating the owner

 

Any suggestions legal that is would be welcome

[raydetinu]

Post a polite notice about not parking as private! or vehicle will be clamped! which you can legally do with due nitice. usually deters most people.

[Barnsley Boy]

Hi, I'm not a fan of private parking companies but the other side of the coin is that I think we should all have consideration for others. Blocking of access / egress etc simply is not on.

 

Signage etc would be the way to go - access to be maintained at all times etc. The clamping idea is tempting, although I wouldn't fancy it myself, don't know what you might be dealing with. It's a shame that not all are born with manners, some have to have them put on.

[patdavies]

I had this is a previous house. There was a private road to the side which gave access to my drive and parents of the local school would use my drive as a turning point.

 

One lady was doing this as I arrived back one morning and as I turned into my drive, probably assumed that I was also turning round and pulled forwards (onto my drive) far enough to let me. She was extremely shocked and more than a little upset when I got out of the car, locked it and went inside the house remarking that I was working nights that week and wouldn't be using my car until about 8:00 pm.

[raydetinu]

I Dnt think you have to go as far as actually employing a clamping security firm, just a sign will do, with a telephone number etc. just make it look official. that would be enough to deter most people! cost about £20 from a sign maker.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

I had this is a previous house. There was a private road to the side which gave access to my drive and parents of the local school would use my drive as a turning point.

 

One lady was doing this as I arrived back one morning and as I turned into my drive, probably assumed that I was also turning round and pulled forwards (onto my drive) far enough to let me. She was extremely shocked and more than a little upset when I got out of the car, locked it and went inside the house remarking that I was working nights that week and wouldn't be using my car until about 8:00 pm.

 

Nice one!

How was it resolved? Did you come back and find your tyres let down?

[patdavies]

Nice one!

How was it resolved? Did you come back and find your tyres let down?

 

 

No. She threatened to call the Police; I said go ahead, they have zero jurisdiction (which isn't quite true, of course!)

 

However, wife (in anything for a quiet life mode) got me to move the car after about a half-hour.

 

Another day, somebody followed me onto my drive in order to turn, so I just stopped short, locked up and walked to the house - leaving him to have to reverse all the way back to the main road through other badly-parked parental cars.

 

Bearing in mind that these parents were trespassing on the private road; never mind my drive!

[demon_x_slash]

We're considering getting one of those lockable posts for the middle of our reserved parking space - you need to be registered with the SIA in order to clamp for a charge, and there is no way we are compromising our principles by acting unlawfully and using '[problem]' tickets to solve the problem of people parking where they shouldn't

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

We're considering getting one of those lockable posts for the middle of our reserved parking space - you need to be registered with the SIA in order to clamp for a charge, and there is no way we are compromising our principles by acting unlawfully and using '[problem]' tickets to solve the problem of people parking where they shouldn't

 

But you don't to release for free. The objective being to allow the motorist to feel they have got off lightly and to perhaps be more careful next time.

[gwc1000]

So, can I just confirm that I have got this right. If I park in an Asda, McDonald's etc. car park the company that patrols them are scumbags thugs and operate outside of the law. However, if somebody has the downright cheek to park on my land it is a different matter, and I am free to block them in with another car, or use the same methods as a PPC and get a supportive slap on the back from other members of CAG?

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

So, can I just confirm that I have got this right. If I park in an Asda, McDonald's etc. car park the company that patrols them are scumbags thugs and operate outside of the law. However, if somebody has the downright cheek to park on my land it is a different matter, and I am free to block them in with another car, or use the same methods as a PPC and get a supportive slap on the back from other members of CAG?

 

No, you haven't got it right.

 

PPCs operate a money making [problem].

No one on this thread has suggested operating one in respect of privately owned land.

Further, this thread is about stopping people preventing access to privately owned and personal property. PPC operators are about something very different.

[gwc1000]

Hi, Bernie. But my point is if PPCs started to block people in with their vans we would cry "unlawful". If we are to stand up for certain principles, when these same principles cause ourselves discomfort, I feel it is a bit rich that these principles fly out of the window. If we don't practice what we preach the credibility of CAG is brought into question.

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

Yes but the reason that PPCs (or clampers) might block people in is to extract money or to prevent the motorist moving their vehicle so they can attach a clamp and extract money.

 

If you take Pat Davies' example, he returned to his home, pulled onto his driveway, parked and went into his house. The blocking in of another motorist was incidental to Pat parking not the primary objective.

 

OK one can argue the morals of doing what Pat did but he was IMHO no worse than the motorist on his property. "Two wrongs don't make a right" but what he could have done is to have said "Oh, I'll move but I'm busting for a sh1t. I'll be back in a bit." And then take some time before returning and letting the motorist know what they should not have done.

[gwc1000]

I agree with your point about the money issue. However in Pat's (somebody who I have a lot of respect for) example the lady was only turning round. If we are to get angry about somebody backing into our own drive merely for turning and not stopping, and feel it is ok to block them in, how can we then argue that if we ourselves actually park on somebody elses land that they don't have the same rights to block us in?

[Bernie_the_Bolt]

I agree with your point about the money issue. However in Pat's (somebody who I have a lot of respect for) example the lady was only turning round. If we are to get angry about somebody backing into our own drive merely for turning and not stopping, and feel it is ok to block them in, how can we then argue that if we ourselves actually park on somebody elses land that they don't have the same rights to block us in?

 

I wouldn't argue if the purpose of the blocking in was firstly for the security of the premises, secondly to protect the legitimate interests of the premises and thirdly and only incidentally to deter by means of inconvenience only.

 

So, if someone enters a carpark clearly signed at the entrance that the gate will be locked at a particular time, a motorist can have no complaint (and will not get support from me) if they arrive late to find the gate locked and cannot get their car out.

 

Just as I alluded to the possibility that Pat may have had his tyres let down, (and worse could have happened) a landowner who does the above may find damage to their gate or locking mechanism.

 

Some may, in these circumstances, have sympathy with the landowner others with the motorist. That is a moral debate I have no desire to get into!