Login | Register
SearchMy Stuff
My ProfileMy PreferencesMy Mates RSS Feed
2 3 4 5
Reply to Topic
Author Discussion

screem

Original Poster:

754 posts

85 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all



As far as motoring law is concerned Can someone please define "access"

And the penalty for disobeying the sign. points and/or fine?

saaby93

12,842 posts

62 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
Much argument not too far away when a road through a village attracted these signs each end. All to stop traffic avoiding a newly installed set of traffic lights on the main road.
There were reumours of police waiting for whoever drove straight through

If every village asked for and got this, what would happen to the road network rolleyes

Don

26,052 posts

168 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
That be a local road for local people.

There's one of these round our way. I access it any time I want as it's a public road that I paid for.

In theory you aren't supposed to use it unless you are visiting an address along it. Proving or disproving this in any meaningful sense is going to be very, very hard even if it is enforceable.

rs1952

3,783 posts

143 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
screem said:
As far as motoring law is concerned Can someone please define "access"
To properties adjoining the road in question. So you can use it if you live there yourself or are visiting a person or a business on that road.

Of course, the likelihood of actually getting caught using it as a through route (unless there is a specific enforcement going on) is virtually nil evil

Don

26,052 posts

168 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
rs1952 said:
screem said:
As far as motoring law is concerned Can someone please define "access"
To properties adjoining the road in question. So you can use it if you live there yourself or are visiting a person or a business on that road.

Of course, the likelihood of actually getting caught using it as a through route (unless there is a specific enforcement going on) is virtually nil evil
And circumventable by simply pausing, looking at someone's front door, deciding they aren't in and continuing your journey.
Advertisement

herewego

6,582 posts

97 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
A lot of road rules wouldn't be needed if it wasn't for selfish behaviour.

saaby93

12,842 posts

62 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
herewego said:
A lot of road rules wouldn't be needed if it wasn't for selfish behaviour.
Since the demise of toll houses, isnt everyone allowed to use any public road to get access to anywhere?

Access to what - whatever's out the other end confused

Edited by saaby93 on Saturday 27th February 14:52

herewego

6,582 posts

97 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
saaby93 said:
herewego said:
A lot of road rules wouldn't be needed if it wasn't for selfish behaviour.
Since the demise of toll houses, isnt everyone allowed to use any public road to get access to anywhere?

Access to what - whatever's out the other end confused

Edited by saaby93 on Saturday 27th February 14:52
You know perfectly well it's saying no thank you to rat runners.

Funk

14,988 posts

93 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
herewego said:
saaby93 said:
herewego said:
A lot of road rules wouldn't be needed if it wasn't for selfish behaviour.
Since the demise of toll houses, isnt everyone allowed to use any public road to get access to anywhere?

Access to what - whatever's out the other end confused

Edited by saaby93 on Saturday 27th February 14:52
You know perfectly well it's saying no thank you to rat runners.
Then the problem isn't the rat-runners, it's that the road network in the surrounding area isn't up to spec. The answer is to improve the rest, not curtail use of what's already there (which would include making conditions on the roads the 'rat-runners' are trying to avoid even worse).

philthy

4,561 posts

124 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
A quick heads up for the OP, do you realise the picture you posted has a camera in it?
Expect a knock from the anti terrorist unit any time now...... wink

Don

26,052 posts

168 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
Funk said:
Then the problem isn't the rat-runners, it's that the road network in the surrounding area isn't up to spec. The answer is to improve the rest, not curtail use of what's already there (which would include making conditions on the roads the 'rat-runners' are trying to avoid even worse).
This.

If a "rat run" exists people will find it. Then they will use it. They've paid road tax and they are entitled to do so.

Putting up a sign saying, effectively, "Please don't use this road you have bought and paid for" is going to be on a hiding to nothing - even if one can sympathise with people living in the locality.

If you want to stop a more convenient route being used you either have to provide an EVEN MORE convenient route - or stop it being a route altogether. If neither is possible or acceptable then putting up a sign is pointless.

Pointless in the same way as yelling at the tide in the hope it won't come in.

saaby93

12,842 posts

62 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
At what point is a road deemed to be a rat run rather than as a busy road going from X to Y?
Is it when its reclassified from an A road to B road or some other definition?

tvrgit

8,151 posts

136 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
Definitions:

If you live on a busy road - it's a rat run.

If you don't, but want to use it - it's not.

There you go, simple as that.

screem

Original Poster:

754 posts

85 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
tvrgit said:
Definitions:

If you live on a busy road - it's a rat run.

If you don't, but want to use it - it's not.

There you go, simple as that.
I like your thinking, but i also think from a legal/bib perspective its not quite that simple, wink

I found another forum that mentioned if you are Proven to have contravened this sign it is a fine but no points? i am struggling to find any more info on google? Anybody else have any joy?

Landshark

1,776 posts

65 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
Stupid sign......."yes officer, i just need to access the other end of this road and the sign says i'am allowed to"

saaby93

12,842 posts

62 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
screem said:
I like your thinking, but i also think from a legal/bib perspective its not quite that simple, wink

I found another forum that mentioned if you are Proven to have contravened this sign it is a fine but no points? i am struggling to find any more info on google? Anybody else have any joy?
From what I remember something was being issued - it might well be an s59? Do it twice and your car's seized?

tvrgit

8,151 posts

136 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
screem said:
tvrgit said:
Definitions:

If you live on a busy road - it's a rat run.

If you don't, but want to use it - it's not.

There you go, simple as that.
I like your thinking, but i also think from a legal/bib perspective its not quite that simple, wink

I found another forum that mentioned if you are Proven to have contravened this sign it is a fine but no points? i am struggling to find any more info on google? Anybody else have any joy?
On a more serious note, when I used to do TROs many years ago, we used to work closely with the local constabulary, and the CC wouldn't support Orders which were impossible to enforce. These "except for access" things were a big no-no at that time - anybody with half a brain could think of an excuse for being there.

We just didn't do them, unless there were also barriers (for example for pedestrianisition schemes) - the signs on their own were useless.

herewego

6,582 posts

97 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
It'll be contravening a no entry which I think would be 3 points and £60 fpn.

Funk

14,988 posts

93 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
I always thought the top sign meant 'Watch out for Evel Knievel'

tvrgit

8,151 posts

136 months

[news] 
Saturday 27th February 2010 quote quote all
herewego said:
It'll be contravening a no entry which I think would be 3 points and £60 fpn.
No, it's a different sign so the penalty may be different (I don't know if it is, but it might be). No entry means no entry - that sign with the plate means entry is allowed "except for access". Obvious, I know, but the penalty for one may not necessarily be the same as the penalty for the other.
2 3 4 5
Reply to Topic