Inconsiderate neighbourly parking - New restrictions?
Discussion
Davel said:
How would an ambulance , fire engine or bin lorry get past ?
Surely the Estate Management company should take this on ?
I really feel for you. What pricks....
Can they get past? That was really what I was trying to understand from the previous answer.Surely the Estate Management company should take this on ?
I really feel for you. What pricks....
My road is narrow, but a lorry can get past parked cars - slowly. An ambulance goes past fine albeit without a huge amount of space.
He's said they don't block the road, so it sounds to me like those things could still get past?
davek_964 said:
I'm not sure I fully understand this answer.
Are you saying that - with the car parked - the road is almost wide enough to get two small cars past it at the same time, and that you could comfortably get a single big car past it?
If so then to be honest I think your neighbour needs to improve their ability to get on and off the driveway. My road is not modem, but is narrow - barely wider than two big cars. We all have driveways, but most of us have multiple cars, and there are some parking spaces between driveways, although they will be opposite other people's driveways. Plus, some people park across their own driveways which inevitably is opposite somebody else's.
All of us manage to get in and out of our driveways regularly. It can be tight - particularly if it's a big car - but it's entirely possible and I'm not aware that anybody has felt the need for parking restrictions.
If there is an overflow car park, I understand that this might not be where they are 'supposed' to park. But from the description it sounds a little like a mountain out of a molehill
Apologies for the lack of clarity. What I'm saying is that with the one car parked by the selfish neighbour, you could *barely* get a small car past, but not a large one.Are you saying that - with the car parked - the road is almost wide enough to get two small cars past it at the same time, and that you could comfortably get a single big car past it?
If so then to be honest I think your neighbour needs to improve their ability to get on and off the driveway. My road is not modem, but is narrow - barely wider than two big cars. We all have driveways, but most of us have multiple cars, and there are some parking spaces between driveways, although they will be opposite other people's driveways. Plus, some people park across their own driveways which inevitably is opposite somebody else's.
All of us manage to get in and out of our driveways regularly. It can be tight - particularly if it's a big car - but it's entirely possible and I'm not aware that anybody has felt the need for parking restrictions.
If there is an overflow car park, I understand that this might not be where they are 'supposed' to park. But from the description it sounds a little like a mountain out of a molehill
With no cars parked, and the road clear you could get a truck by there.
I'm sure the friendly neighbours can 'manage' in the sense that they eventually get it done, but it is with considerable difficulty, a 30 point turn and much wasted time so they don't accidently bump the other car. I think their request is reasonable especially as the other bloke knows he bought a property with 1 spot and has brought 4 cars along to the party.
It needn't be a big issue, but save for the fact the one bloke is being very inconsiderate to others persistently. Personally I'm no fan of parking restrictions but it's the one time I have seen it would actually make life better for people in 3 households who are affected by it. The bloke causing the issue would still suffer no hardship either as there's still ample parking right nearby.
Davel said:
How would an ambulance , fire engine or bin lorry get past ?
Surely the Estate Management company should take this on ?
I really feel for you. What pricks....
On a day like Saturday where it all blew up, they wouldn't be able to. Rozzers did eventually come round hours later to try sort it all out but by then we'd eventually forced the matter.Surely the Estate Management company should take this on ?
I really feel for you. What pricks....
But yes, when the road is blocked, about 14 houses are cut off, and no emergency access can be made.
On more than one occassion when I've been working from home, I have had the bin men knocking on doors asking if the offending party (that nasty bloke/his wife) can move the car.
konark said:
TBH it's the developers who have partly caused this problem.
No development - luxury or high-end - is going to cope with people owning 4 cars when they only have 1 space. That's the problem here - not the developers - it's the tw*t family who could park their extra cars somwhere less bothersome. Mr_Megalomaniac said:
But yes, when the road is blocked, about 14 houses are cut off, and no emergency access can be made.
On more than one occassion when I've been working from home, I have had the bin men knocking on doors asking if the offending party (that nasty bloke/his wife) can move the car.
With that in mind, it seems odd that there isn't a covenant in place to stop people parking on the road at all.On more than one occassion when I've been working from home, I have had the bin men knocking on doors asking if the offending party (that nasty bloke/his wife) can move the car.
I can't see many people using an overflow car park a whole minute away unless they absolutely have to - most people genuinely believe they have a divine right to park outside their house.
Yeah it's a combination of factors but yes the development is one of them.
None of the other families park on the road. Most of the drives will accommodate 2 cars with only a few exceptions. This particular area of the estate with the terraced housing seems to be the one exception area, but it's really only one family causing all the issues. The others seem to manage just fine.
As you said, seems like they feel it's their inviolable right to be at all times less than 5m from their front door or some other delusion.
None of the other families park on the road. Most of the drives will accommodate 2 cars with only a few exceptions. This particular area of the estate with the terraced housing seems to be the one exception area, but it's really only one family causing all the issues. The others seem to manage just fine.
As you said, seems like they feel it's their inviolable right to be at all times less than 5m from their front door or some other delusion.
surveyor_101 said:
98/100 understand common decency says you don't park your car over someones drive.
Can you neighbour not park their car/s blocking their own drive?
Parking is a such a hot topic I have seen and had my fair share of parking disputes and rarely when it descends to a confrontation, unless the problem person/s backs down you in for a lifetime of issues and its just a massive stress causes if it bothers you.
Threaten legal action against the land agent, not alot else you can do.
I had a neighbour who parked on a private off road space and police suggested I put a lockable bollard in front, when I blocked him in. I had a word he threatened me and then called the police when I didn't run scared, police were more pee'ed I blocked him in than him having the front to park in a space 5 houses away from his that was nothing to do with him.
From another thread running on here it is not illegal to block someone in so long as it is a permanent adjustable structure. I.e a gate or bollard. It is however illegal to use a temporary method. I.e parking you car there to block him in. Can you neighbour not park their car/s blocking their own drive?
Parking is a such a hot topic I have seen and had my fair share of parking disputes and rarely when it descends to a confrontation, unless the problem person/s backs down you in for a lifetime of issues and its just a massive stress causes if it bothers you.
Threaten legal action against the land agent, not alot else you can do.
I had a neighbour who parked on a private off road space and police suggested I put a lockable bollard in front, when I blocked him in. I had a word he threatened me and then called the police when I didn't run scared, police were more pee'ed I blocked him in than him having the front to park in a space 5 houses away from his that was nothing to do with him.
Edited by surveyor_101 on Monday 17th February 16:12
I have yet to see the source for this.
I’ve often wondered what I would do in this exact situation. I think I might have gone out for a walk when the coppers turn up. Or be sat on the bog needing a s
t and unable to come and remove said bollard/gate straight away. Darn right bloody rude parking on someone else’s property.
See watchfulyeye post
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
Edited by MB140 on Monday 17th February 18:14
barryrs said:
Is this family a tenant of a housing association?
If so it might be worth complaining to them.
Unfortunately not. This part of the estate is predominantly help-to-buy, so would need to be owner-occupied. I did do a companies house search on that address and nothing showed up so I suspect the association/body corporate which is responsible for the common areas and access ways is the legal entity that would be the only one able to instruct them not to park there?If so it might be worth complaining to them.
But I'm not that well-versed in English law.
So that's why I am wondering what the steps are for a body corporate to be able to place their own restriction and demarcate one area as a no-parking zone.
Mr_Megalomaniac said:
On a day like Saturday where it all blew up, they wouldn't be able to. Rozzers did eventually come round hours later to try sort it all out but by then we'd eventually forced the matter.
But yes, when the road is blocked, about 14 houses are cut off, and no emergency access can be made.
On more than one occassion when I've been working from home, I have had the bin men knocking on doors asking if the offending party (that nasty bloke/his wife) can move the car.
Hmm... If the estate is still under development perhaps the developers might be more interested knowing that there is a family who require police to be called out due to heated debate... Could hurt sales.But yes, when the road is blocked, about 14 houses are cut off, and no emergency access can be made.
On more than one occassion when I've been working from home, I have had the bin men knocking on doors asking if the offending party (that nasty bloke/his wife) can move the car.
Also if I were buying a house where bin collection is potentially being missed I might think again.
In short, covenants are usually in place to help developers sell the houses, and enforced as such. So even with no covenants in place, a developer still wants to sell houses so will try to counter factors that go against that.
oyster said:
I wonder if one day we’ll look back at episodes like this with astonishment that we stored so much under-utilised machinery.
There’s so much ‘pooling’ of resources elsewhere in our lives that it will become inevitable for cars in our suburban neighbourhoods.
Get on a bus and you will see why owning is so very worth it.There’s so much ‘pooling’ of resources elsewhere in our lives that it will become inevitable for cars in our suburban neighbourhoods.
MB140 said:
From another thread running on here it is not illegal to block someone in so long as it is a permanent adjustable structure. I.e a gate or bollard. It is however illegal to use a temporary method. I.e parking you car there to block him in.
I have yet to see the source for this.
It's from here:I have yet to see the source for this.
Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 said:
Part 3, Chapter 2 - Section 54: Offence of immobilising etc. vehicles
(1) A person commits an offence who, without lawful authority—
(a) immobilises a motor vehicle by the attachment to the vehicle, or a part of it, of an immobilising device, or
(b) moves, or restricts the movement of, such a vehicle by any means,intending to prevent or inhibit the removal of the vehicle by a person otherwise entitled to remove it.
(2) The express or implied consent (whether or not legally binding) of a person otherwise entitled to remove the vehicle to the immobilisation, movement or restriction concerned is not lawful authority for the purposes of subsection (1).
(3) But, where the restriction of the movement of the vehicle is by means of a fixed barrier and the barrier was present (whether or not lowered into place or otherwise restricting movement) when the vehicle was parked, any express or implied consent (whether or not legally binding) of the driver of the vehicle to the restriction is, for the purposes of subsection (1), lawful authority for the restriction.
(4) A person who is entitled to remove a vehicle cannot commit an offence under this section in relation to that vehicle.
(5) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—
(a) on conviction on indictment, to a fine,
(b) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum.
(6) In this section “motor vehicle” means a mechanically propelled vehicle or a vehicle designed or adapted for towing by a mechanically propelled vehicle.
(1) A person commits an offence who, without lawful authority—
(a) immobilises a motor vehicle by the attachment to the vehicle, or a part of it, of an immobilising device, or
(b) moves, or restricts the movement of, such a vehicle by any means,intending to prevent or inhibit the removal of the vehicle by a person otherwise entitled to remove it.
(2) The express or implied consent (whether or not legally binding) of a person otherwise entitled to remove the vehicle to the immobilisation, movement or restriction concerned is not lawful authority for the purposes of subsection (1).
(3) But, where the restriction of the movement of the vehicle is by means of a fixed barrier and the barrier was present (whether or not lowered into place or otherwise restricting movement) when the vehicle was parked, any express or implied consent (whether or not legally binding) of the driver of the vehicle to the restriction is, for the purposes of subsection (1), lawful authority for the restriction.
(4) A person who is entitled to remove a vehicle cannot commit an offence under this section in relation to that vehicle.
(5) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—
(a) on conviction on indictment, to a fine,
(b) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum.
(6) In this section “motor vehicle” means a mechanically propelled vehicle or a vehicle designed or adapted for towing by a mechanically propelled vehicle.
Drumroll said:
Mr_Megalomaniac said:
I live in a new development in Kent. It's a mixture of detached, semi-detached and somewhat more affordable terraced housing. Because it's just out of town naturally everyone has cars for convenience of commuting and getting about. Some of the properties are larger and have garages and others do not. The roads around the estate are quite narrow though.
Narrow roads are the problem with most modern housing estates. This.
Narrow roads, supposed detached houses built within 2ft of each other. Places built with no driveways, instead a communal car park which no one will use because of the fear of exercise walking back to their property. Front door within 2ft of the pavement and generally living on top of one another.
Usually after a very short period of time these cheaply built places end up like the classic sinkhole estates..
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff