Just a LITTLE bit against the law... Options

[motormad]

Life is like the Matrix.
Some rules can be bent. Others can be broken.

[Claude]

What are the rules for parking on the green cycle lanes, St John's Road for instance.

Good question, and my guess is there are no rules. The lower end of Andover Road is the same, with people parking half on the pavement and half over the green cycle lane. I guess it comes down to what parking restrictions exist - single or double yellow lines, and if there are none then you can park wherever you like. Is my interpretation correct, or are these people breaking a law?

And what's the situation with parking half on the pavement and half on the road, is that allowed? What if it makes it difficult for mothers pushing pushchairs, or disabled folk in wheelchairs?

[Biker1]

Is it illegal to drive in a cycle lane (obviously when there are no cycles using it) as I see many drivers doing that?

[Nothing Much]

I avoid cycle lanes because of the pot holes,broken bottles, manhole covers that stick up...That is why cycles are meant to use them.
Actually I've just been watching a short TfL video on Youtube and it would seem that the advanced green box is enforceable with fines and 3 points, nothing about the lanes though.

As for parking on pavements. Very short term OK, but all day probably comes under selfishness.

There are areas where residents can park on pavements but they are marked out and signed.
ce

[spartacus]

I know they say that every day's a school day, but this is ridiculous. Some of us really need to brush up on our Highway Code.

Cycles Lanes are covered in Rule 63 and Rule 140 of The Highway Code (part)

63
Cycle Lanes. These are marked by a white line (which may be broken) along the carriageway (see Rule 140). Keep within the lane when practicable. When leaving a cycle lane check before pulling out that it is safe to do so and signal your intention clearly to other road users. Use of cycle lanes is not compulsory and will depend on your experience and skills, but they can make your journey safer.

140
Cycle lanes. These are shown by road markings and signs. You MUST NOT drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a solid white line during its times of operation. Do not drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a broken white line unless it is unavoidable. You MUST NOT park in any cycle lane whilst waiting restrictions apply.
Law RTRA sects 5 & 8

The cycle lanes near the St Johns Roundabout are all broken white lines and so they are advisory rather than mandatory, so you COULD technically park on them - but then you COULD get prosecuted for parking dangerously on the approach to a roundabout.


Parking half on and half off the 'pavement' is NOT OK. It's covered by legislation as a potential obstruction offence (though getting the local boys in blue to enforce is a non-starter unless you actually have to climb over the roof of a car to get past). There is no offence of 'parking on the footway', so unless a vehicle is causing a serious problem for pedestrians to get past the ONLY other offence the police can issue a ticket for is the one of 'driving on the footway', which is an offence under Section 72 of the Highways Act 1835 (That's right 1835! A law that was introduced to control those well-to-do dandies rushing around on their velocipedes (or 'Dandy Horses') is still used to this day and now controls Yummy Mummies in their 4x4's) - although the police hardly bother with that either..... They have to have seen the offence taking place so they can prosecue the driver rather than ticket the car....


The 1835 Act states "If any person shall wilfully ride upon any footpath or causeway by the side of any road made or set apart for the use or accommodation of foot passengers; or shall wilfully lead or drive any horse, as$, sheep, mule, swine, or cattle or carriage of any description, or any truck or sledge, upon any such footpath or causeway; or shall tether any horse, as$, mule, swine, or cattle, on any highway, so as to suffer or permit the tethered animal to be thereon." then they're guilty of the offence. It's been updated a bit.. Instead of horses it's things with horses under the bonnet.

[Biker1]

I know they say that every day's a school day, but this is ridiculous. Some of us really need to brush up on our Highway Code.

Thanks for that. Could have looked up myself (as you had to before you knew the answer! ) I suppose but was in a hurry!.
"Some of us!"
I like the rule covering broken white lines cycle lanes (which most of them are) and the word "unavoidable".
Probably makes it difficult to bring a prosecution? (as if one ever has been?)

[Strafin]

I know Parking half on and half off the 'pavement' is NOT OK.

If that is the case, why do the council keep drawing parking spaces half on and half off the pavement, Newtown Road for example?

There is certainly some mixed messages when it comes to working it out.
http://www.confused.com/car-insurance/arti...ut-for-new-laws

[Biker1]

If that is the case, why do the council keep drawing parking spaces half on and half off the pavement, Newtown Road for example?

It says in the Highway Code (yes here I go quoting again! ) "You MUST NOT park partially or wholly on the pavement in London, and should not do so elsewhere unless signs permit it."
I presume that the dotted parking lines in the cases you state must mean that signs permit it?

[Andy Capp]

My understanding is that councils outside London may put up prohibition signs for parking on pavements without first seeking government approval, but there is no national law regards parking on pavements. Only London prohibits parking on pavements by law.

I believe that 'should not' is not the same as 'must not'. 'Must not' is absolute, but 'should not' is another form of 'not recommend', i.e. although not acceptable, there may be times or circumstances where something is acceptable.

[Biker1]

My understanding is that councils outside London may put up prohibition signs for parking on pavements without first seeking government approval, but there is no national law regards parking on pavements. Only London prohibits parking on pavements by law.

I believe that 'should not' is not the same as 'must not'. 'Must not' is absolute, but 'should not' is another form of 'not recommend', i.e. although not acceptable, there may be times or circumstances where something is acceptable.

OK how about this one then?? ......................
Rule 145

"You MUST NOT drive on or over a pavement, footpath or bridleway except to gain lawful access to property, or in the case of an emergency."

To park on the pavement you must have driven on it??

[Andy Capp]

OK how about this one then?? ......................
Rule 145

"You MUST NOT drive on or over a pavement, footpath or bridleway except to gain lawful access to property, or in the case of an emergency."

To park on the pavement you must have driven on it??

That is right, but there is no law preventing you from doing so. The HC is not law, it is effectively a (occasionally flawed) reference guide to laws and good practice. It can also be used as evidence for proof of liability in a court of law.

[Biker1]

That is right, but there is no law preventing you from doing so.

Laws Highways Act 1835 sect 72 & Road Traffic Act 1988 sect 34
EDIT - Just realised an act dating from 1835 (well before cars) still in force!

The HC is not law, it is effectively a (occasionally flawed) reference guide to laws and good practice. It can also be used as evidence for proof of liability in a court of law.

"Many of the rules in The Highway Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or be disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words ‘MUST/MUST NOT’"

[Strafin]

OK how about this one then?? ......................
Rule 145

"You MUST NOT drive on or over a pavement, footpath or bridleway except to gain lawful access to property, or in the case of an emergency."

To park on the pavement you must have driven on it??

I guess that is a good point, but to prosecute you would have to prove that, which is probably why it doesn't get enforced.

[Andy Capp]

"Many of the rules in The Highway Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or be disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words ‘MUST/MUST NOT’"

Note the word many.

I guess that is a good point, but to prosecute you would have to prove that, which is probably why it doesn't get enforced.

To prosecute, you have to have broken the law. The Highway Code is not the law, but reliance upon it might be used as evidence in court.


At the end of the day, it is fact that there is no blanket law in the UK and outside London preventing an 'ordinary' car being parked on or partially on the pavement. However, if a policeman sees you do it, you can get a fixed penalty notice, but unlike speeding, you are not obliged to tell the officer who parked the car.

[Biker1]

I guess that is a good point, but to prosecute you would have to prove that, which is probably why it doesn't get enforced.

I suppose you could claim that it had been dropped there by crane!

[Biker1]

Note the word many. I repeat, The Highway Code is not the law in itself, but it refers to laws within it. For clarity, are you disagreeing with my view regards the Highway Code?

No - I agree the Highway Code is not the law BUT the words MUST in it refer to the law and if you break that rule you are breaking the law.

[Andy Capp]

No - I agree the Highway Code is not the law BUT the words MUST in it refer to the law and if you break that rule you are breaking the law.

Yes but in the context of the thread, the words 'must not' refer to 'driving'; not 'being parked'.

[Biker1]

Yes but in the context of the thread, the words 'must not' refer to 'driving'; not 'being parked'.

Yep, "driving" on the pavement!!

[Andy Capp]

Yep, "driving" on the pavement!!

Yes, so a car 'parked', is not a car being 'driven'.

[newres]

Yes, so a car 'parked', is not a car being 'driven'.

Don't you have to drive in order to park?