Two case histories:

A gym advertised by parking a great number of cars around various boroughs. Each car had a very large ‘A’ board on top that was the advert., some also had a Sinclair C5 on top and then the board. In time the cars became an eyesore, accumulated rubbish, etc. Two other police divisions had tried to deal with the problem but, on the advice of his solicitor, the owner claimed that the vehicles were courtesy cars for use by his customers. All were taxed and insured.

A motor repairer had a small premises on a residential street and parked customer cars (sometimes with major parts removed during repair) and vehicles that he was restoring for sale (also, often with engines and gearboxes removed). At times he had 10 – 15 vehicles in a short street. The gutters and road edges became covered in grease and oil. In this case the garage owner had previously been acquitted for various offences relating to ordinary parking offences, construction and use and tax and insurance.

At the time, the Met. Police had a “Legislation Desk” in Traffic Control with a very knowledgeable constable in charge. He said, “Nelmes v Rhys Howells Transport”. This is a case in which the transport firm had a very small yard. Every morning, the lorries were moved from the yard to stand in the road and residents complained. The local police summoned the firm for highway obstruction. On appeal it was held that the highway was not to be used as a storage space – different from normal parking.

“Nelmes v Rhys Howells Transport” was used this successfully both against the gym and against the motor repairer, even to the extent that, after the vehicles were removed, the two offenders gave up.

Police can proceed as follows: 

First warn the owner that he is obstructing the highway, quoting “Nelmes v Rhys Howells Transport”, and stating that he must cease to obstruct the highway. 

A second warning stating the likely consequences of failure to comply should be made two or three days later. 

In the meantime, and over a period of a week, mark the exact position of the vehicles, e.g. by making a small crayon mark on the kerb and noting the position of the tyre valves using a clock face. It is impossible for vehicles to be moved and to return with all four valves in exactly the same positions.

Next, either before or after trading hours, ticket the vehicles and have a removal crew on hand. Then remove the vehicles.

In the case of the gym, the owner, after arguing through his solicitor for the whole of the day, gave in when told that a storage charge would be applied if the vehicles were not collected by the end of the day. When the solicitors argued that they would collect the vehicles and argue the case in court, the same legislation officer gave chapter and verse on why the vehicles stayed impounded until the case was settled and that, if the owner lost, he would be liable for a daily storage charge for the total number of days for each vehicle.  

In the case of the motor repairer, the owner also gave in after similar arguments. He lost quite a few customers as a result of his being responsible for their cars being impounded (the police didn’t take any that were obviously undergoing short repairs). He gave up on his own derelicts and paid up to have his customers cars returned.

The trick will, of course, be to get the local parking enforcers to see this as a community problem that should be addressed and to put some effort into it and to have their managers back them by fending off the easy option of giving in when the first solicitor rings and threatens action.

Finally, anyone putting a 'for sale' sign in a car parked on the street could be proscuted by a local council official for illegal, unlicensed street vending.