Double yellow line validity
Discussion
Almost got a ticket this morning as a jobsworth little hitler arrived in our street at 8am. There's a problem in our street (87 cars for 54 spaces), so there's not much option but to park on the yellows. There's an unwritten agreement with the council that the warden's don't come too early on a Saturday, and not at all on a Sunday.
The sign where the resident's bay ends and the double yellows start only has a plate showing the resident's zone. There is no pole or plate for the double yellows, nor can I see a plate anywhere down the other side of the road where the double yellows are.
Validity please?
The sign where the resident's bay ends and the double yellows start only has a plate showing the resident's zone. There is no pole or plate for the double yellows, nor can I see a plate anywhere down the other side of the road where the double yellows are.
Validity please?
streaky said:Of course not, we're dealing with a local council here
Are the lines unbroken along their length and correctly terminated at both ends?
Just trying to build up an arsenal of excuses here!
I advised the little hitler this morning that he should consider getting a proper job, to which the reply was a grunt. Point proven!!
streaky said:
Double yellow = no parking at any time. AFAIK, there's no requirment for an explanatory plate. Are the lines unbroken along their length and correctly terminated at both ends? - Streaky
Correct, a plate's no longer needed. As for end bars being required I still got rolled over despite an appeal and then a review of the appeal. I even sent in a copy of the regulations showing the requirement for the end bars. Held, against me by an independant tribunal lawyer who said the council had made an effort!! He also said the signage requirements stuff wasn't statute, required by law. How do you argue against that. At least it cost me £60 and them a lot more. Make them pay more everytime. Now where's me matches.
What amazes me is that in Aberdeen, we (the rate payers for want of a better word) are having to shell out £200,000 to take the NO PARKING AT ANY TIME poles down as they are no longer required by law.
Our local council did point out to the London beurocrats that we have something up here called SNOW, and it will obliterate the yellow lines, making the signs a necessity.
Our local council did point out to the London beurocrats that we have something up here called SNOW, and it will obliterate the yellow lines, making the signs a necessity.
Presume Puggit that this was within a Controlled Parking Zone?
AIUI The entry signs outlines the restriction and the lines show the restriction. No yellow time plates are required unless the restriction imposed on that bit of road is different to that indicated on the zone entry sign. The bay sign is there to cover for the residents.
DVD
AIUI The entry signs outlines the restriction and the lines show the restriction. No yellow time plates are required unless the restriction imposed on that bit of road is different to that indicated on the zone entry sign. The bay sign is there to cover for the residents.
DVD
Puggit
Then there must be an argument that there should be a plate.
Traffic Signs and General Directions state that continuous prohibition plate sign 637.3 has to be used in conjuction with sign 1018 (double yellow). How would you know what exactly the restriction is otherwise.
A CPZ makes this clear by signing on the plate on entry.
M6fiesta
DYL is sign 1018 in the above Regs and is defined in shape and dimensions including the end T Bar. If it doesn't comply then the restriction isn't lawful.
Prior to LA's decriminalising parking etc then one had the option of fighting this at a Mags Court and onwards on appeal to Crown Court and beyond if you had the cash. Now the fine is a civil debt and matters chased through County Court as debt default if not paid. There is an appeal system, which in my opinion is flawed as it gives no further avenue after the Adjudicator. I do not know how one can get around this. Maybe a civil action against the LA for recovery of fine paid for an illegal parking?
DVD
DVD
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Sunday 8th May 15:47
Then there must be an argument that there should be a plate.
Traffic Signs and General Directions state that continuous prohibition plate sign 637.3 has to be used in conjuction with sign 1018 (double yellow). How would you know what exactly the restriction is otherwise.
A CPZ makes this clear by signing on the plate on entry.
M6fiesta
DYL is sign 1018 in the above Regs and is defined in shape and dimensions including the end T Bar. If it doesn't comply then the restriction isn't lawful.
Prior to LA's decriminalising parking etc then one had the option of fighting this at a Mags Court and onwards on appeal to Crown Court and beyond if you had the cash. Now the fine is a civil debt and matters chased through County Court as debt default if not paid. There is an appeal system, which in my opinion is flawed as it gives no further avenue after the Adjudicator. I do not know how one can get around this. Maybe a civil action against the LA for recovery of fine paid for an illegal parking?
DVD
DVD
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Sunday 8th May 15:47
DVD - according to the highway code it appears that no plate is needed?
www.highwaycode.gov.uk/signs09.htm#along
www.highwaycode.gov.uk/signs09.htm#along
That is interesting Puggit as the double lines are accompanied by (No waiting) AT ANY TIME signs or seasonal in my Department of Transport "Know your signs book"
As the lines can be accompanied by sign plates - Ped Zone, Seasonal, Loading set times, Taxis exempt, Control Zone restriction, then I would have thought that there was a need to emphasis "at any time"
I am sure we have those plates on lines outside my lane just nicely installed so will check.
As I said my understanding was that it was required.
If not I stand corrected.
DVD
As the lines can be accompanied by sign plates - Ped Zone, Seasonal, Loading set times, Taxis exempt, Control Zone restriction, then I would have thought that there was a need to emphasis "at any time"
I am sure we have those plates on lines outside my lane just nicely installed so will check.
As I said my understanding was that it was required.
If not I stand corrected.
DVD
Hi DVD,
"DYL is sign 1018 in the above Regs and is defined in shape and dimensions including the end T Bar. If it doesn't comply then the restriction isn't lawful"
I know you're right but they stuffed my by saying it wasn't a legal requirement for the council to maintain the end bars. So, if the council are busy they can forget about their obligations and still dish out the tickets! You saw the pics but I even had the appeal re-opened and the next independant barrister defended the first barrister. It beggers belief what they are getting away with. Policy may vary from council to council.
Boosted.
"DYL is sign 1018 in the above Regs and is defined in shape and dimensions including the end T Bar. If it doesn't comply then the restriction isn't lawful"
I know you're right but they stuffed my by saying it wasn't a legal requirement for the council to maintain the end bars. So, if the council are busy they can forget about their obligations and still dish out the tickets! You saw the pics but I even had the appeal re-opened and the next independant barrister defended the first barrister. It beggers belief what they are getting away with. Policy may vary from council to council.
Boosted.
Puggit
Been digging and have come up with what could be a can of worms.
Can you tell me the town you live in and to your knowledge does it have an Order entitled something like: (quick phone call to LA?)
The Road Traffic (Permitted Parking Area and Special Parking Area (.....Name of your town...) Order 2005 (or 2004)?
Will explain when you reply.
DVD
DVD
Been digging and have come up with what could be a can of worms.
Can you tell me the town you live in and to your knowledge does it have an Order entitled something like: (quick phone call to LA?)
The Road Traffic (Permitted Parking Area and Special Parking Area (.....Name of your town...) Order 2005 (or 2004)?
Will explain when you reply.
DVD
DVD
). 
Right Puggit, lets try and make some sense of all this. Bear in mind that I am only a retired Traffic Plod, retain a keen intrest in Traffic matters and what follows is my interpretation.
A Waiting restriction (DYL etc) comes into being in relation to Reading from a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) made under Section 1 Road Traffic Regulation Act. Section 5 of that Act makes it an offence to contravene a TRO which prior to 1991 was dealt with by Fixed Penalty Notice and avenue to Magistrates Court if disputed/not paid and then even onto Higher Court on Appeal.
As the result of a TRO made then signing has to conform to that mentioned in Traffic Signs and General Directions 2002 in shape, colour and design. If it does not do so then it is an unauthorised sign unless Sec of State has made a special authorisation. Diagram 1018 shows the colour, dimension and shape of DYL and as I stated earlier as far as I am aware has to be accompanied by a Plate Diagram 637 (prohibition at any time). This is not needed in relation to a Controlled Parking Zone which will indicate at its start on its plate any time limits. Where there is a change from a DYL to a single or other restriction then both restrictions should be earmarked by sign plates at point of change. Incorrect signing opens the arguement that the TRO is not enforceable and can either be accepted as such at the start or contested at Court. In fact in Hassan v DPP [1992] it was held if the signing wrong then no offence of contravention can be prosecuted.
But, in 1991, came The Road Traffic Act of that year
allowing under Schedule 4 for Local Authorities to apply for Permitted Parking Area and Special Parking Area on roads specified within, in your case, the Borough of Reading and were granted The Road Traffic (Permitted Parking Area and Sepcial Parking Area)(Borough of Reading) Order, 2000 in force on 20.10.2000.. This basically decriminalises parking offences within the Borough by taking enforcement out of the hands of the Police and by allowing Local Authorities to enforce (and collect revenue) by appointing their own Wardens (or subcontract). It removes the criminal effect of Section 5 RTRA 1984 (offence to contravene a TRO on Waiting restriction) It removes enforcement through Magistrates Court and recovery of fines if not paid, as a civil debt, through County Court. It also sets up an appeal process terminating with an Adjudicator, who it appears his last word is final with no further avenue of appeal.
You will from previous posts appreciate that as far as the criminal law is concerned then guilt has to be established "beyond any reasonable doubt" whereas in civil action only "on the balance of probability" which it would appear is being used by Adjudicators. Decisions involving TPO where Parking Order is in force seems to be that the spirit of the law is being applied as opposed to the letter of the law as in criminal cases thus allowing minor signing defects to be ignored. I have checked with a well respected Police Traffic source who tell me that disputes on signing are out of the window because of the decriminalisation aspect.
Finally, not everywhere is covered, only those areas that have applied for the Order not where I live, Contravention of a DYL leads to a Fixed penalty Ticket which if not paid is processed through the Magistrates Court, this giving an Appeal process greater that that of the LA where an order is in force. I do not know what Police do in areas where an order is in force if they come across a DYL contravention. Do they ignore or issue a FPN on behalf of Local Authority and process through them?. Perhaps a serving BiB in a large town where an Order is in force can advise.
I appreciate the above may cause some questions that I cannot resolve. Being "out of harness" my avenues of research are greatly restricted.
DVD
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Tuesday 10th May 14:45
A Waiting restriction (DYL etc) comes into being in relation to Reading from a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) made under Section 1 Road Traffic Regulation Act. Section 5 of that Act makes it an offence to contravene a TRO which prior to 1991 was dealt with by Fixed Penalty Notice and avenue to Magistrates Court if disputed/not paid and then even onto Higher Court on Appeal.
As the result of a TRO made then signing has to conform to that mentioned in Traffic Signs and General Directions 2002 in shape, colour and design. If it does not do so then it is an unauthorised sign unless Sec of State has made a special authorisation. Diagram 1018 shows the colour, dimension and shape of DYL and as I stated earlier as far as I am aware has to be accompanied by a Plate Diagram 637 (prohibition at any time). This is not needed in relation to a Controlled Parking Zone which will indicate at its start on its plate any time limits. Where there is a change from a DYL to a single or other restriction then both restrictions should be earmarked by sign plates at point of change. Incorrect signing opens the arguement that the TRO is not enforceable and can either be accepted as such at the start or contested at Court. In fact in Hassan v DPP [1992] it was held if the signing wrong then no offence of contravention can be prosecuted.
But, in 1991, came The Road Traffic Act of that year
allowing under Schedule 4 for Local Authorities to apply for Permitted Parking Area and Special Parking Area on roads specified within, in your case, the Borough of Reading and were granted The Road Traffic (Permitted Parking Area and Sepcial Parking Area)(Borough of Reading) Order, 2000 in force on 20.10.2000.. This basically decriminalises parking offences within the Borough by taking enforcement out of the hands of the Police and by allowing Local Authorities to enforce (and collect revenue) by appointing their own Wardens (or subcontract). It removes the criminal effect of Section 5 RTRA 1984 (offence to contravene a TRO on Waiting restriction) It removes enforcement through Magistrates Court and recovery of fines if not paid, as a civil debt, through County Court. It also sets up an appeal process terminating with an Adjudicator, who it appears his last word is final with no further avenue of appeal.
You will from previous posts appreciate that as far as the criminal law is concerned then guilt has to be established "beyond any reasonable doubt" whereas in civil action only "on the balance of probability" which it would appear is being used by Adjudicators. Decisions involving TPO where Parking Order is in force seems to be that the spirit of the law is being applied as opposed to the letter of the law as in criminal cases thus allowing minor signing defects to be ignored. I have checked with a well respected Police Traffic source who tell me that disputes on signing are out of the window because of the decriminalisation aspect.
Finally, not everywhere is covered, only those areas that have applied for the Order not where I live, Contravention of a DYL leads to a Fixed penalty Ticket which if not paid is processed through the Magistrates Court, this giving an Appeal process greater that that of the LA where an order is in force. I do not know what Police do in areas where an order is in force if they come across a DYL contravention. Do they ignore or issue a FPN on behalf of Local Authority and process through them?. Perhaps a serving BiB in a large town where an Order is in force can advise.
I appreciate the above may cause some questions that I cannot resolve. Being "out of harness" my avenues of research are greatly restricted.
DVD
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Tuesday 10th May 14:45
Jeepers Puggit your wearing my pinkies out.....
Just to add more confusion. Once the Adjudicator makes his decision, on application for certain grounds he can re-open and re assess. Now this to me smells a bit and it would have been better if review was conducted by another independent adjudicator.
Still, have a look at Reg 11 of the below:
http://tinyurl.com/az7zj
As stated earlier how does one prove innocence after the Adjudicator has dug his heels in. Can only think maybe by taking an action at County Court (not up to speed on civil matters).
DVD
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Tuesday 10th May 13:13
Just to add more confusion. Once the Adjudicator makes his decision, on application for certain grounds he can re-open and re assess. Now this to me smells a bit and it would have been better if review was conducted by another independent adjudicator.
Still, have a look at Reg 11 of the below:
http://tinyurl.com/az7zj
As stated earlier how does one prove innocence after the Adjudicator has dug his heels in. Can only think maybe by taking an action at County Court (not up to speed on civil matters).
DVD
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Tuesday 10th May 13:13
Just to add more confusion. Once the Adjudicator makes his decision, on application for certain grounds he can re-open and re assess. Now this to me smells a bit and it would have been better if review was conducted by another independent adjudicator.
DWD
It is another adjudicator but he's probably chummy with the first one
Boosted.
DWD
It is another adjudicator but he's probably chummy with the first one
Boosted.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff