Parking code 27 (dropped kerb)

[green_and_mean]

where is the rule that requires an attendant to enforce a dropped kerb serving my own driveway?

 

The is no rule requiring a CEO to enforce anything, he does however have the power to enforce if 'he has reasonable cause to beleive' a contravention has taken place, which in your example would be parked across a dropped kerb without loading or the permission of landowner. It would be hard to determin if the exemption applied so the benefit of doubt is given unless a complaint is received from the householder.

[green_and_mean]

Since you are finding this so hard to grasp I will try to give a better example. A CEO can in theory issue to any vehicle that is stopped on a DYL instantly, the onus would then be on the driver to prove an exemption such as loading applied. Very few Councils use this protocol since it leads to a huge amount of appeals and upsets people. They instead give an observation period to determin if any obvious exemption applies. This observation is NOT a legal requirement and a PCN is valid without it, its just Council protocol. The same applies to drop kerbs to avoid issuing to hundreds of exempt vehicles just to catch a few guilty ones protocol is to not enforce single use drives except on request. This does not mean if a CEO sees a driver park over a drive and has reasonable belief its contravening he cannot issue. Some Councils such as Harringay do create a register of exempt vehicles and will enforce any vehicle not on the list without a request.

[nero12]

Since you are finding this so hard to grasp I will try to give a better example. A CEO can in theory issue to any vehicle that is stopped on a DYL instantly, the onus would then be on the driver to prove an exemption such as loading applied. Very few Councils use this protocol since it leads to a huge amount of appeals and upsets people. They instead give an observation period to determin if any obvious exemption applies. This observation is NOT a legal requirement and a PCN is valid without it, its just Council protocol. The same applies to drop kerbs to avoid issuing to hundreds of exempt vehicles just to catch a few guilty ones protocol is to not enforce single use drives except on request. This does not mean if a CEO sees a driver park over a drive and has reasonable belief its contravening he cannot issue. Some Councils such as Harringay do create a register of exempt vehicles and will enforce any vehicle not on the list without a request.

 

Where are the regs! And how do you know all this.!

[green_and_mean]

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).

(3) The second exception is where the vehicle is parked outside residential premises by or with the consent (but not consent given for reward) of the occupier of the premises.

This exception does not apply in the case of a shared driveway.

(4) The third exception is where the vehicle is being used for fire brigade, ambulance or police purposes.

(5) The fourth exception is where—

(a) the vehicle is being used for the purposes of delivering goods to, or collecting goods from, any premises, or is being loaded from or unloaded to any premises,

(b) the delivery, collection, loading or unloading cannot reasonably be carried out in relation to those premises without the vehicle being parked as mentioned in subsection (1), and

© the vehicle is so parked for no longer than is necessary and for no more than 20 minutes.

(6) The fifth exception is where—

(a) the vehicle is being used in connection with any of the following—

(i) undertaking any building operation, demolition or excavation,

(ii) the collection of waste by a local authority,

(iii) removing an obstruction to traffic,

(iv) undertaking works in relation to a road, a traffic sign or road lighting, or

(v) undertaking works in relation to a sewer or water main or in relation to the supply of gas, electricity, water or communications services,

(b) it cannot be so used without being parked as mentioned in subsection (1), and

© it is so parked for no longer than is necessary.

(7) In this section “carriageway”, “cycle track” and “footway” have the meanings given by section 329(1) of the Highways Act 1980 (c. 66).

(8) References in this section to parking include waiting, but do not include stopping where—

(a) the driver is prevented from proceeding by circumstances beyond his control or it is necessary for him to stop to avoid an accident, or

(b) the vehicle is stopped, for no longer than is necessary, for the purpose of allowing people to board or alight from it.

(9) The prohibition in this section is enforceable as if imposed—

(a) in Greater London, by an order under section 6 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (c. 27),

(b) elsewhere in England and Wales, by an order under section 1 of that Act.

[lamma]

a list of "exempt vehicles". what are you and they on

?

how on earth can you know the regs of every car I have authorised to park across my dropped kerb. Nor am I required to tell you and even if I was your list would not be up to date..

and would they tally which dropped kerbs matched up to which "exempt vehicles".

All they have to do is know where the entitled to enforce and where they are not. that comes under "doing the job 101"

Typical council mis-step to dress things up and cover up enforcement

being misapplied.

[green_and_mean]

a list of "exempt vehicles". what are you and they on

?

how on earth can you know the regs of every car I have authorised to park across my dropped kerb. Nor am I required to tell you and even if I was your list would not be up to date..

and would they tally which dropped kerbs matched up to which "exempt vehicles".

All they have to do is know where the entitled to enforce and where they are not. that comes under "doing the job 101"

Typical council mis-step to dress things up and cover up enforcement

being misapplied.

 

Its not exactly rocket science is it? If you are fed up of people blocking your drive you fill in the supplied form with a list of approved vehicles and mail it to the Council. The CEO sees AB55ABC across the drive of 12 Accacia Avenue checks his list for No. 12 and if the VRM is not on it gives it a PCN.

[lamma]

You are committing a category error.

The exemption applies to the dropped kerb, NOT vehicles.

ALL the council has to do is its job properly and not ticket where it has not been authorised to enforce. If it has not been authorised then ANY vehicle can park there.

And there is NO requirement to provide such a list - which can never be kept up to date anyway- as the enforcement applies to the kerb not to 'exempt vehicles' which is figment of the council's imagination albeit one that you adhere to despite the clear fallacy involved.

Parking enforcement is a legal process even for decriminalised parking. Councils can't just make it up.

But then many councils knowingly enforce on bays and box junctions that they know are not compliant..... they love making it up for some reason... I suspect its the cash

[green_and_mean]

You are committing a category error.

The exemption applies to the dropped kerb, NOT vehicles.

ALL the council has to do is its job properly and not ticket where it has not been authorised to enforce. If it has not been authorised then ANY vehicle can park there.

And there is NO requirement to provide such a list - which can never be kept up to date anyway- as the enforcement applies to the kerb not to 'exempt vehicles' which is figment of the council's imagination albeit one that you adhere to despite the clear fallacy involved.

Parking enforcement is a legal process even for decriminalised parking. Councils can't just make it up.

But then many councils knowingly enforce on bays and box junctions that they know are not compliant..... they love making it up for some reason... I suspect its the cash

 

(3) The second exception is where the vehicle is parked outside residential premises by or with the consent (but not consent given for reward) of the occupier of the premises.

 

I still fail to see how you cannot grasp such a simple concept as this.The Council can if the law provides (as in this case) enforce where they like, they do NOT need the permission of the householder or anyone else to enforce the contravention permission is granted by statute. There is no such thing as an 'exempt dropped kerb' any dropped kerb can be enforced, the only exemption to this would be if a householder specificly stated in writing to the Council that ANY car could park across their drive way and never wanted it to be enforced. Why anyone would choose to do that would escape me as it would make having a drop kerb pointless.

[lamma]

Well at least you have dropped this crazy 'list of authorised vehicles' idea - it seems.

The "the vehicle" refers to the vehicle being ticketed - what on earth makes you think that means a list has to be supplied, it does not.

 

oh and no, you are wrong. there are exemptions as you listed yourself - they do not have carte blanch for dropped kerb ticketing as you well know. You quoted the act and then don't want to admit it.

With your absolute conviction perhaps you should instead explain this Hounslow council - although as they seem to understand the regulations you may have a hard task convincing them that you concept is correct.

 

From the "Operational Guidance

to Local Authorities:

Parking Policy and Enforcement" which I am sure you have read.

"The contravention does not apply to specified exemptions, such as the

emergency services, alighting, unloading, building works, road works, and the like. Nor does it apply where a vehicle is parked outside residential premises with the occupier’s consent (but it does apply if that consent has been paid for).

This exception does not apply in the case of a shared driveway. This

exception suggests that authorities should not take enforcement action

where a vehicle is parked outside residential premises unless the occupier

has asked the enforcement authority to do so. Authorities will need to

check that the individual making such a request is entitled to do so."

 

There is NO requirement whatsoever on the householder to give list of vehicles (or an ANY vehicle authorisation). The housholder has to ask for enforcement BEFORE the council can enforce. The council has to get it right and know where it can enforce - ahh perhaps I now see why you are taking the stance you are and trying to shift responsibility away from the councils having to do their jobs properly. Just because the TMA makes it hard for the council thats tough. The TMA is a bit of mess including especially in the area of dropped kerbs - the enforcement of which is optional by the way.

[green_and_mean]

Well at least you have dropped this crazy 'list of authorised vehicles' idea - it seems.

The "the vehicle" refers to the vehicle being ticketed - what on earth makes you think that means a list has to be supplied, it does not.

 

oh and no, you are wrong. there are exemptions as you listed yourself - they do not have carte blanch for dropped kerb ticketing as you well know. You quoted the act and then don't want to admit it.

With your absolute conviction perhaps you should instead explain this Hounslow council - although as they seem to understand the regulations you may have a hard task convincing them that you concept is correct.

 

From the "Operational Guidance

to Local Authorities:

Parking Policy and Enforcement" which I am sure you have read.

"The contravention does not apply to specified exemptions, such as the

emergency services, alighting, unloading, building works, road works, and the like. Nor does it apply where a vehicle is parked outside residential premises with the occupier’s consent (but it does apply if that consent has been paid for).

This exception does not apply in the case of a shared driveway. This

exception suggests that authorities should not take enforcement action

where a vehicle is parked outside residential premises unless the occupier

has asked the enforcement authority to do so. Authorities will need to

check that the individual making such a request is entitled to do so."

 

There is NO requirement whatsoever on the householder to give list of vehicles (or an ANY vehicle authorisation). The housholder has to ask for enforcement BEFORE the council can enforce. The council has to get it right and know where it can enforce - ahh perhaps I now see why you are taking the stance you are and trying to shift responsibility away from the councils having to do their jobs properly. Just because the TMA makes it hard for the council thats tough. The TMA is a bit of mess including especially in the area of dropped kerbs - the enforcement of which is optional by the way.

 

If you took the time to read my posts correctly I never said anyone HAD to give a list of exempt vehicles. I said that some Councils had decided to create a list of exempt vehicles to enable enforcement without a request. Unlike you you many householders would prefere not to arrive home each day to find their drive blocked, find somewhere to park legally, ring the Council, then await a response. It is far easier to register to the scheme give the Council a list of vehicles that can park with your permission and then just allow them to enforce to any others without a request.

No drop kerb is exempt only vehicles ARE exempt, try reading the statute again. Shared drives are different because more than one person uses it, you cannot give permission or park yourself since OTHER people need access. The contravention is the same what ever drive or drop kerb it is. No where in the staute does it say that Councils need authority to enforce nor do they need it as long as they have reasonable belief a contravention has taken place.

It follows that without knowing who owns the house or car it would be impossible to know a contravention had taken place hence the need for co-operation with the householder before enforcement. However if a CEO was requested to enforce outside 55 High Road and in error went to 55 High Street and issued to a vehicle that was coincidently also parked in contravention a lack of request to enforce would not invalidate the PCN as the vehicle was not exempt ie he had no permission to park from the owner.

[lamma]

"However if a CEO was requested to enforce outside 55 High Road and in error went to 55 High Street and issued to a vehicle that was coincidently also parked in contravention a lack of request to enforce would not invalidate the PCN as the vehicle was not exempt ie he had no permission to park from the owner."

The fact is that many councils issue against single occupancy dropped kerbs without there being a request to enforce in place. So what if the

 

err no, the CEO wouldn't know if the request to enforce had been made by 55 High road.

Have read the statute - it does exempt vehicles, it exempts enforcement under certain circumstances. When a householder does ask for enforcement he asks for it against the dropped kerb not a particular vehicle or vehicles. the dropped kerb can be empty and unblocked when he makes the request - there is no 'tie-in'

So the TMA makes it hard for the councils, so what ? this is just one the flaws. just look how many times they are having to insert "includes a non-metropolitan district council." because of that cods up.

[green_and_mean]

"However if a CEO was requested to enforce outside 55 High Road and in error went to 55 High Street and issued to a vehicle that was coincidently also parked in contravention a lack of request to enforce would not invalidate the PCN as the vehicle was not exempt ie he had no permission to park from the owner."

The fact is that many councils issue against single occupancy dropped kerbs without there being a request to enforce in place. So what if the

 

err no, the CEO wouldn't know if the request to enforce had been made by 55 High road.

Have read the statute - it does exempt vehicles, it exempts enforcement under certain circumstances. When a householder does ask for enforcement he asks for it against the dropped kerb not a particular vehicle or vehicles. the dropped kerb can be empty and unblocked when he makes the request - there is no 'tie-in'

So the TMA makes it hard for the councils, so what ? this is just one the flaws. just look how many times they are having to insert "includes a non-metropolitan district council." because of that cods up.

 

Not sure what you are going on about now but a CEO would know the address of the request (in order to know where to go!!) and usually the VRM of the offending vehicle. Without the VRM the CEO could end up issuing to the householder if the contravening car has moved before he arrived. The is no flaw as far as dropped kerbs go its a contravention unless exempt the same as any other parking contravention.

[pompeyjeff]

I rang my local council this afternoon about just this subject and what I was told was a little shocking, but great news.

 

"Restrictions on parking across a dropped kerb are only enforceable if you are blocking a vehicles exit from the space served by the dropped kerb. They are not enforceable when blocking access to the parking space"

[the_freedom_trail]

I rang my local council this afternoon about just this subject and what I was told was a little shocking, but great news.

 

"Restrictions on parking across a dropped kerb are only enforceable if you are blocking a vehicles exit from the space served by the dropped kerb. They are not enforceable when blocking access to the parking space"

 

Do you mean that they are only enforceable when the car is on the drive. What if the car park space/drive is empty because someone has gone out - how do they get back on to their property?

 

TFT

[green_and_mean]

I rang my local council this afternoon about just this subject and what I was told was a little shocking, but great news.

 

"Restrictions on parking across a dropped kerb are only enforceable if you are blocking a vehicles exit from the space served by the dropped kerb. They are not enforceable when blocking access to the parking space"

 

It depends on the Council area, if its enforced by Police that may be true but its not the case in a Council enforced area. Whilst the Council may choose not to enforce the contravention legally any obstruction of a drop kerb can be enforced.

[TheBogsDollocks]

This is an interesting debate to an anorak such as me. The DfT Operational guidance to LA's gives clear advice;

 

 

8.62

The contravention does not apply to specified exemptions, such as the

emergency services, alighting, unloading, building works, road works, and the

like. Nor does it apply where a vehicle is parked outside residential premises

with the occupier’s consent (but it does apply if that consent has been paid

for). This exception does not apply in the case of a shared driveway. This

exception suggests that authorities should not take enforcement action

where a vehicle is parked outside residential premises unless the occupier

has asked the enforcement authority to do so. Authorities will need to

check that the individual making such a request is entitled to do so.

 

[TheBogsDollocks]

Actually I think I may have stumbled upon a flaw in the whole dropped kerb and double parking debacle within Greater London.

 

 

Statutory Instrument 2009/1116 was recently introduced to enable sections 85 and 86 of the TMA 2004 to be enforced without the need for signage.

(4) Nothing in this regulation requires the placing of any traffic sign on or near a road, or the maintenance of such signs, in a special enforcement area in England for the purpose of providing information to road users as to the effect of section 85 or 86 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 in that area.

S.I. 2009/1116 then advises as to what is to be regarded as a special enforcement area in regard to sections 85 & 86 ,

(5) In paragraph (4) a “special enforcement area” means an area designated as a special enforcement area by means of—

(a) an order made under paragraph 1(1) or 3(1) of Schedule 10 to the Traffic Management Act 2004 ; or

(b) an order which, by virtue of paragraph 2(5) or 3(5) of that Schedule, has effect as if it were an order so made."

See Schedule 10 of the TMA 2004;

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=All+Legislation&title=traffic+management+act+2004&searchEnacted=0&extentMatchOnly=0&confersPower=0&blanketAmendment=0&sortAlpha=0&TYPE=QS&PageNumber=1&NavFrom=0&parentActiveTextDocId=1606563&ActiveTextDocId=1606769&filesize=368

All the councils within Greater London acquired Special Parking Area status under the provision of section 76 of the Road Traffic Act 1991. Therefore (5)(a) above from S.I 2009/1116 does not apply. Nor does (5)(b) of S.I 2009/1116 apply in most if not all cases, as section 2(5) of Schedule 10 TMA 2004 relates to the “Variation of special enforcement area by Mayor of London” while 3(5) of Schedule 10 TMA 2004 does not apply as it relates to the “Designation of special enforcement areas outside Greater London".

It is section 1(5) within Schedule 10 of the TMA 2004 that enables Special Parking Areas created under section 76 of the RTA 1991 to now be considered as Special Enforcement Areas under the TMA 2004.

(5) An order in force immediately before the commencement of this Part of this Act under section 76 of the Road Traffic Act 1991 (c. 40) designating an area in Greater London as a special parking area has effect on and after the commencement of this Part of this Act as if it were an order under this paragraph designating the area as a special enforcement area.

However, S.I. 2009/1116 does not include section 1(5) of Schedule 10 TMA 2004 within its definition of what can be considered as a Special Enforcement Area where sections 85 and 86 TMA 2004 are concerned.

(5) In paragraph (4) a “special enforcement area” means an area designated as a special enforcement area by means of—

(a) an order made under paragraph 1(1) or 3(1) of Schedule 10 to the Traffic Management Act 2004 ; or

(b) an order which, by virtue of paragraph 2(5) or 3(5) of that Schedule, has effect as if it were an order so made."

Due to this omission the London Boroughs within Greater London do not possess any legal exemption that negates the need to erect traffic signs informing that it is prohibited to park adjacent to a dropped kerb and to park in a manner where no part of the vehicle is within 50 centimetres of the edge of the carriageway.

 

This is what I think but would welcome any input that agrees or can point to legislation that says otherwise.

[starfarer]

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).

(3) The second exception is where the vehicle is parked outside residential premises by or with the consent (but not consent given for reward) of the occupier of the premises.

This exception does not apply in the case of a shared driveway.

(4) The third exception is where the vehicle is being used for fire brigade, ambulance or police purposes.

(5) The fourth exception is where—

(a) the vehicle is being used for the purposes of delivering goods to, or collecting goods from, any premises, or is being loaded from or unloaded to any premises,

(b) the delivery, collection, loading or unloading cannot reasonably be carried out in relation to those premises without the vehicle being parked as mentioned in subsection (1), and

© the vehicle is so parked for no longer than is necessary and for no more than 20 minutes.

(6) The fifth exception is where—

(a) the vehicle is being used in connection with any of the following—

(i) undertaking any building operation, demolition or excavation,

(ii) the collection of waste by a local authority,

(iii) removing an obstruction to traffic,

(iv) undertaking works in relation to a road, a traffic sign or road lighting, or

(v) undertaking works in relation to a sewer or water main or in relation to the supply of gas, electricity, water or communications services,

(b) it cannot be so used without being parked as mentioned in subsection (1), and

© it is so parked for no longer than is necessary.

(7) In this section “carriageway”, “cycle track” and “footway” have the meanings given by section 329(1) of the Highways Act 1980 (c. 66).

(8) References in this section to parking include waiting, but do not include stopping where—

(a) the driver is prevented from proceeding by circumstances beyond his control or it is necessary for him to stop to avoid an accident, or

(b) the vehicle is stopped, for no longer than is necessary, for the purpose of allowing people to board or alight from it.

(9) The prohibition in this section is enforceable as if imposed—

(a) in Greater London, by an order under section 6 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (c. 27),

(b) elsewhere in England and Wales, by an order under section 1 of that Act.

 

Any change on delivery exemptions??

 

And can someone describe Anorak's loophole or BogsDollocks above in very simple english words

[TheBogsDollocks]

Anorak's argument was correct at the time but since then the legislation has been amended via a correction slip to close the loophole.

 

The text below is making the council's scratch their heads of late.

 

Dear Council

 

I note from the PCN that the council considers my vehicle to have been parked adjacent to land considered by them to be footway.

 

It is necessary to bring to the council’s attention that the parts of a road considered by law to be and not to be footway, is not decided by physical appearance. A footway is not legally defined simply by the presence of a curb and a raised surface, just as a carriageway is not legally defined simply by the placing of tarmac. Under law, what exists is road, otherwise known as highway.

 

The public has a right of way over all land that is public road. How the public exercise this right of way is not regulated by default. Therefore, unless regulation is imposed then the public can traverse over any road by any means, be it by foot, motor vehicle, bicycle etc. Government recognises that such unregulated use of a road is not only dangerous but also poor traffic management and so Government has introduced various laws to regulate how traffic flows over a road. Of these laws the most pertinent to this case is the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.

 

The 1984 Act enables an authority to regulate by order not only vehicular traffic use on a road but also pedestrian traffic; see sections 2(3) and 6(1). Therefore an authority is able to restrict what class of traffic can use a road or part of a road. The 1984 Act clearly treats pedestrians as a class of traffic as equally as it does cars, bicycles, buses, etc and therefore any part of a road restricted to use only by those on foot (a footway) is required to be regulated by order in precisely the same manner that cycle lanes, bus lanes and parking bays need to be created and regulated by order. Such orders are requisite to lawfully deny a class or classes of traffic their right of way that would otherwise exist over those parts of road.

 

Considering the above, for the alleged contravention to be lawfully correct then it is requisite that a traffic order does regulate that part of road where my vehicle was parked adjacent to as being restricted to use by those on foot only(a footway). Therefore I require the council to confirm whether or not the area of road adjacent to where my vehicle was parked is identified in any order as being a footway. Where an order does exist then I require a full copy to be made immediately available to me. If no such order exists then where I parked cannot lawfully be considered as being adjacent to a dropped footway since the legal status of being a footway has not been lawfully bestowed upon that part of road and that part of road therefore remains as undesignated highway. In such circumstances the penalty charge should be cancelled forthwith as the contravention did not occur.

 

I look forward to either the council’s confirmation that the penalty charge has been cancelled or a full explanation detailing why the council lawfully considers that part of road to be adjacent to a dropped footway.

 

Yours with love, hugs & kisses

[starfarer]

Thanks for that and no doubt will leave someone scratching their head This only came up yesterday evening and as of yet, we don't know on which types of dropped kerbs (the road has 3 driveway access and 2 pedestrian crossing) the PCN was issued. This is straight NTO (but council only do reg 9 here), no pictures, the driver is almost certain that at no any time PCN was attached on van or ever CEO about to issue. In fact, Driver don't recall any moment when there was a CEO nearby his van. He is not certain but could've parked in one of access to residential property only because he needed to do the delivery. Digging up all the delivery receipts for the alleged day of contravention.

 

IMO CEO's are targeting this part of the area and issuing "GHOST" PCN's. Not long, we'd one win the case at PATAS ( the report got lost), 1 dropped by council on goodwill gesture and now this which they alleged was happened in early march (!!!). Anyway :

a) Do loading exemptions apply on all types of dropped kerb?

b) any difference between "dropped kerb" and "dropped footway"?

c)

Therefore I require the council to confirm whether or not the area of road adjacent to where my vehicle was parked is identified in any order as being a footway. Where an order does exist then I require a full copy to be made immediately available to me. If no such order exists then where I parked cannot lawfully be considered as being adjacent to a dropped footway since the legal status of being a footway has not been lawfully bestowed upon that part of road

; dropped kerb/footway requires traffic order or should described as such in traffic order? is this definite and no exceptions?

d)

Exactly....PCNs are only issued to private driveways upon receiving a complaint. If this was not the case they would be dishing out hundreds of PCNs a day.

is this standard procedure consistent over all enforcement authorities?

[green_and_mean]

is this standard procedure consistent over all enforcement authorities?

 

Yes it would be crazy if it wasn't, around here nearly every single crossover has a car parked across the drop kerb because its their drive and they are entitled to. If councils started dishing out PCNs without complaints there would be an uproar! This does only apply to single domestic drop kerbs though if its a shared drive or non residential then anyone parked there is fair game.

[starfarer]

Few questions relating to dropped kerb. PCN at PATAS waiting for hearing. Just want to be sure about few things.

 

1) First thing and most important is, do any of these dropped kerb or dropped footway ENFORCEMENT needs TRO? or council are free to "create" one anywhere they want anytime and issue PCN.

2) As council are claiming that the alleged "dropped kerb" is for lowered to help wheelchair users and powered mobility vehicles, and classifed as "uncontrolled crossing".

• is there requirement for minimum length of dropped kerb or minimum lenght on where lowered dropped footway is on level with carriageway.
  
• Does it need to have its pair dropped kerb on other side of the road just to indicate it's a crossing. absolute requirement or deviation allowed??
  
• what about the advisory "H" white line.

3) Possible that dropped kerb serves no function. Where and how to check?

4) Searched almost everywhere but what are the legal requirements for dropped kerb (at uncontrolled crossing) to be enforceable and where it is mentioned.

 

Thanks.

[alibabes]

Help, just read most of this but need advice

 

Friend just got ticket for parking opposite my house. Back 3 ft of car next to a kerb the rest over the start a double car width dropped kerb. people park there all the time and the friend, electrician was doing work tonight and parked there as easy for carrying tools over

can he get off? also put wrong colour on ticket