goo.gl/maps/aVxabKC3nb22
Ian had a delivery for Mama Roma last Friday and when he tried to park in the loading bay there was a blue Badge holder parked in it.
He went round the block twice and it was still there so on the third attempt he double parked and tipped one pallet off but promptly got a parking ticket for £60.
The Traffic Warden didn't want to know about the BB Holder in the bay despite the fact he could have parked on the red route.
It's unclear whether Islington Council allow BB Holders to park in loading bays as they say they don't but as the loading bay is inside the red route paintwork is it parked in the loading bay or not.
I wanted to dispute it but Ian just paid it. *tut*
Was I right or not?
Pat
|
Hmmm.
I think Ian is probably right.
My starting point is that the Red Route prohibits loading other than in marked bays, is that correct?. Double parking may be against the rules too. If so the offence, or infringement if we adopt the language of decriminalised parking enforcement, was committed and observed. None of the defences available for a PCN seem to be available, see tinyurl.com/zco6fox (CA public website).
Any excusal would be a 'let off ' due to mitigating circumstances. I suspect Islington Council don't do mitigation for anything short of a dire emergency or similar. Charged with keeping thoroughfares like the A1 open and moving and given the time etc needed to deal with hard cases both ways I think that is sort of understandable. Pre Brompton I also wasted far too much time on buses in Southampton Row/Woburn Place because deliveries obstructed the road.
As a matter of practical policy making you either accept those delays or prioritise keeping the traffic moving, at least in peak, and force businesses to manage deliveries accordingly.
A complaint about failure to book the BB holder might ease your feelings but not much else.
Sorry!!
Of course if loading is permitted, even if double parked, and the question was whether loading was taking place, it would be game on
|
Mmmm. the BB car wasn't loading at all, in fact he/she was nowhere to be seen.
...and your verdict doesn't make me feel any better:)
>>>and force businesses to manage deliveries accordingly<<
Yes, it's even more annoying to find the delivery went there on Thursday (parked neatly in the loading bay) and they refused it on the basis it was a day too early.
Pat
|
|
From what I remember when I was transporting a blue badge holder, parking in loading bays was strictly prohibited. I wonder why a ticket wasn't issued to them, unless things have changed.
|
That's exactly my point BT.
I've told him he's getting paid too much if he can afford £60 without a protest email.
...and I was going to do the email for him too.
Pat
|
Does his lorry have a dashcam?
If so couldn't you use the footage to try an appeal and ask why the perp wasn't ticketed? I presume it would record their number plate.
|
>> If so couldn't you use the footage to try an appeal and ask why the
>> perp wasn't ticketed? I presume it would record their number plate.
In order to mount a successful appeal Ian would need to persuade the Council or the Tribunal that one of the statutory grounds applies; tinyurl.com/zco6fox .
'Somebody else was getting away with it' is NOT a statutory ground.
It might be mitigation but Councils, particularly in London, are very reluctant to concede in such cases.
Cheshire East Council have made their policy on mitigation public:
www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/car_parks_and_parking/penalty_charges/how_to_appeal_against_a_pcn/mitigating_circumstances.aspx
You'd be lucky to get through one of those loopholes.
Best to pay while the discount applies.
And the one key advice from CAB (which obviously doesn't apply here) is NEVER ignore a ticket in hope it will go away. It will not, never, ever.
The amount will escalate and it will end up with bailiffs. Then, except in very exceptional circumstances, it's too late to appeal.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 16 Jun 16 at 14:29
|
£60 is not a big enough fine for delivery drivers double parking on red routes. I think it should be £600 and three points. Who on earth does Ian think he is to dare to block a red route like that?
Just because somebody else was breaking the law doesn't mean that he can too.
No sympathy, sorry! And I can't think what he can appeal on as he was patently in contravention of regulations.
Last edited by: Mapmaker on Fri 17 Jun 16 at 10:36
|
Of course Mapmaker, you're journey is far more important than anything else.
How do you think the food you eat gets to your table?
Mama Roma won't take deliveries at night, expect you arrive on time for a booking time and won't pay for a delivery to be re-delivered because of access problems so who do you think should foot the bill?
Perhaps your pomposity should be directed at Islington Council who allow and grant permission for businesses to be run along red routes.
Rock and a hard place is not a position you're used to being in, is it?
Take it back to Cambs and you're wrong with your employer.
Ride around the block all day and be late for your next 4 deliveries, collect fines from 2 of them and your wrong with everyone.
Block ONE lane of TWO for less than 5 minutes and pay £60 out of your own pocket and you're still not right.
All because a BB Holder who could have legally parked 10 yards further up on the red route lane out of the loading bay, couldn't be bothered, yet you don't see them as contributory to the cause of the problem?
Pat
|
Ian has my sympathies. If the people turned the delivery away because it arrived a day early, and he could not legally park to unload on the correct day, I would have driven off. And later emailed a pic of the BB holder to both the council and Head office of Roma.
This is assuming the BB holder was parked illegally
|
If the BB holder was parked rathe than loading he was parked illegally.
"If you are displaying a Blue Badge you may stop in the bay to drop off or pick up the Blue Badge holder only. Please display the Blue Badge clearly on the dashboard"
Rules for Red Line routes.
tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/red-routes/rules-of-red-routes/loading-for-the-public
Unfortunatley the BB driver's attitude reflects the widely held view that rules are for other people.
|
|
It could also be a forged BB or non disabled driver.
|
>>Unfortunatley the BB driver's attitude reflects the widely held view that rules are for other people.
Much as with the lorry driver in the OP. I find the level of arrogance of both those drivers who considered it acceptable to snarl up an already busy and ill-tempered city extraordinary.
|
OK Mappy, so what should Ian have done in your very experienced eyes of being an impatient car driver with people to see and places to go?
Tell me please?
Don't criticise unless you can offer an acceptable solution.
Pat
|
>>Of course Mapmaker, you're journey is far more important than anything else.
We know Ian thought that his was. Arrogant doesn't even begin to describe his behaviour.
>>All because a BB Holder who could have legally parked 10 yards further up on the red
>>route lane out of the loading bay, couldn't be bothered, yet you don't see them as
>>contributory to the cause of the problem?
Oh yes. I'd take away their blue badge for a year (or possibly two). And I'd take away Ian's HGV licence for a year too (maybe only six months).
Neither of them would do it again; don't you agree? The complete lack of courtesy towards other road users they both displayed needs to be tackled with firm sanctions.
BTW, cab drivers stopping on red routes would also lose their licence for a year. Again, the problem would cease overnight.
Last edited by: Mapmaker on Fri 17 Jun 16 at 13:52
|
>>Oh yes. I'd take away their blue badge for a year (or possibly two). And I'd take away Ian's HGV licence for a year too (maybe only six months).
<<
What an unbelievably selfish attitude.
You'd take away a BB Holders means of transport and put a lorry driver on benefits for a perceived 'lack of courtesy'.
Has it ever occurred to you that both of them may just have thought it was time to return the 'courtesy' they get on a daily basis from the likes of you?
Good job it wasn't me, after I'd got the ticket I would have stood and had a fag by the side of the lorry and laughed at you before I moved!
£60 would have been well spent then:)
Pat
|
>>Has it ever occurred to you that both of them may just have thought it was time to return
>>the 'courtesy' they get on a daily basis from the likes of you?
Eh? Me? What have I done?
As for what Ian could have done? Come back later. Same as the rest of us have to do when the car park is full. What was he doing that was so important that it entitled him to BREAK THE LAW? Is he a policeman? Or the Royal Mail? There are plenty of spaces to park that have no 'no waiting' restrictions. Warlters Road will have had some free yellow line I'm sure.
BTW, London is full of red-route parking-offence cameras. I wouldn't ever dare stop on a red route to let a passenger out, let alone park up. How is it so difficult to understand the meaning of 'red route'?
Finally, BB was entitled to park there for up to three hours. goo.gl/maps/npr3VUsbSEq So Ian was wrong to blame him. No BB was not contributory.
>>A little research revealed that interestingly Royal Mail have an exemption<<
>Exactly...but under Mappy's regime they wouldn't have!
Spot on. There are always places you can park that don't disadvantage other road users; it's a matter of plain and simple courtesy - do you care about anybody other than yourself?
|
|
So what would you have done if you were in Ian's situation Mapmaker ?
|
We have a crazy situation in our town. It's a collection of what were once medieval streets, very narrow and really not suited to vehicular traffic in many cases. However, because of clever use of one way systems and pedestrianised areas it sort of works unless someone leaves a vehicle parked when it snarls everything up.
The town is well provided with car parks though and the parking fees aren't onerous at 60p for an hour or £1.00 for two hours.
But, and here's where it all falls apart, the car parks are patrolled so non-payment is penalised and that's as it should be I guess. However, there are no traffic wardens patrolling the streets where the real problem lies. Resultantly, the more selfish drivers with local knowledge just park on the double yellows or even the pedestrian precincts knowing that they won't get a ticket because there's no one to issue one.
Very occasionally the local police have a purge but it's so infrequent as to not even slightly deter the serial transgressors who can't be bothered to pay 60p or walk a couple of hundred yards.
|
|
Our council parking enforcers do the car parks and streets. One that catches out non local BB users is all vehicles are banned from the pedestrianised areas after 12 noon and the marked bays must be used, there must be access for deliveries with tight junctions which would be blocked by inconsiderate parking. Anything in the pedestrian area after 12 noon would be a ticket magnet.
|
Ian has my sympathy too! And I'd love to know what Mapmaker's solution is.
If I was in Ian's shoes I might have waited until the traffic warden turned up and spoken with them, i.e. blocking the road in doing so :-)
I was once in Manchester city centre near the Triangle/Corn Exchange. Wife was taking an item back so I stopped nearby and waited in the car - she'd not be long. Traffic warden was seen approaching so I thought best to move - they told me technically I wasn't parked and I could wait there. They said this because I was sat in the car with the engine running - hence in their eyes not parked.
The traffic warden surprised me.
|
>>Oh yes. I'd take away their blue badge for a year (or possibly two). And I'd take away Ian's HGV licence for a year too (maybe only six months).
<<
Just shown Ian this bit
His reply......Well that's me , you and the entire Post office ***** then, and the whole of London starving into the bargain. No more than they deserve with that attitude!
Don't shoot the messenger Mappy.
Pat
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 18 Jun 16 at 17:54
|
Don't shoot the messenger...
That wouldn't help the Post Office either.
|
The comment about the Post Office intrigued me. A little research revealed that interestingly Royal Mail have an exemption
" TfL does not issue Penalty Charge Notices
(PCNs) to Royal Mail vehicles in the course of carrying out their normal
duties. The nature and extent of traffic and parking controls on the
Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) are set out within our Traffic
Management Orders (TMOs). A TMO is an order made by a local authority
such as TfL under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984; it is a
contravention of these controls that may give rise to the issuing of a
Penalty Charge Notice. By law, TfL is required to publish notices in a
local newspaper which advertise the proposal and effects of TMOs. A
typical TMO sets out that:
“The controls specified in article 3(1) and (2) [of the TMO] do not apply
in respect of a vehicle bearing a livery which is used by a universal
service provider and which is stopped at the edge of the carriageway of a
red route for as long as may be necessary for the purposes of the
|
>>A little research revealed that interestingly Royal Mail have an exemption<<
Exactly...but under Mappy's regime they wouldn't have!
Pat
|
Just to add my twopence worth,
In general surely the problem is between the customer and the haulage firm.
If the customer has no suitable place to deliver to it is up to them to make sure their deliveries can be transported / collected from wherever is suitable, round the corner etc.
If the item cannot be delivered legally there needs to be a suitable process for the driver to contact the dispatcher or whoever for a suitable alternate or, if this is not possible and double parking is the only option, in the real world, then the ticket is the company's problem or the customer's problem not the driver who is presumably the least able to afford it.
|
|
Yes, CD. The customer's attitude has similarities to the way people regard the road outside their houses as somehow 'theirs', rather than public space available to all within the rules of the road. If the contract with the haulier assumes unimpeded access to a space that is not theirs to control, I'd be surprised if it was even enforceable.
|
If the space to deliver is not available and there is no easy alternative, ie round the corner not viable in this case since we are talking of a "pallet", then the delivery should be aborted and the customer should pay for a second delivery when space will be available, eg out of hours.
What seems very wrong in this case is Ian being clobbered whichever he does
|
>>What seems very wrong in this case is Ian being clobbered whichever he does
That's about it.
The other driver shouldn't have parked in the loading bay, but that doesn't give someone else the right to double park. So Ian shouldn't have double parked, and if he got a penalty, then paid it. Which is pretty much what he did. I don't see why Ian should get any special treatment, not that he appears to be asking for it.
However, Ian getting penalised if he does not deliver in such circumstances is what is wrong with the situation. I have no idea what the penalty or impact would be, I guess Ian does and made what he felt was the better move. Seems unfair though.
|
Holloway Road Parking Problems. - Bromptonaut
