A member of my car club recently reported that they had received a fixed penalty notice for undersize number plate, whilst the car was sitting in a Tesco car park.
Can this be defended because the car was not actually on public roads?
This question could also apply to underbody neons, driving without seatbelts etc, well all manner of things really. All possibly defendable because "the cars part of a photoshoot for a magazine officer, honest"
Obviosusly this sort of thing has overtones of "croozing, innit mate" but I am strictly interested in the legal side of things, not the antisocial behavoiur side, which is a different offence.
|
|
I heard something along the lines of; if the land is accessible to the general public (for example, Tesco are inviting the general public in) then all the road laws have to be adhered to. So the old practice when I grew up of kids having driving lessons from their folks at 15 on Asda's car park on a Sunday was probably pretty illegal too. Not sure how accurate this is, but I don't think there's too much defence here.
|
About 10 years or so ago, I'm almost sure that a ruling was passed that any private roads ore areas used regularly by the public such as supermarket car parks, would come under the juristiction of the Road Traffic Act or similar act with regard to driving offences, accidents, insurance coverage etc.
But it is not a definitive recollection.
|
Been doing a search and found this about Stirling University:
tinyurl.com/3sh7y
Of course this being Scotland it may not apply in England or Wales, but it is interesting that the university authorities rule that:
All roads within the Campus come under the Road Traffic Acts and Police may be called to deal with any serious breaches of the Acts.
The speed limit for vehicles within the Campus is 20 miles per hour and vehicles must at all times be driven in accordance with theHighway Code and with due care and consideration for all vehicular traffic, pedestrians, University property and wildlife.
Drivers must treat pedestrian crossings on the Campus in the same way as those located off campus.
|
|
|
why are underbody neons illegal???
|
|
Because they breach Vehicle Lighting Regulations - hence the sudden disappearance a few years ago of those that were attached to various parts of cars.
|
|
|
A supermarket car park is a 'route of good intention' and therefore Traffic Laws apply. A friend's car was involved in an accident in a railway car park whilst he wasn't in the car - the police tried to get out of helping by claiming it was private land. An official complaint to the Chief Constable resulted in a full apology as the police should have helped.
Similarly a colleague's son left his car in a railway car park whilst he went drinking - no intention of driving the car until the next morning. Went back to the car later in the evening to get something and was followed by the police - he was breathalysed and arrested for being over the limit (BTW he had his day in Court and won by convincing the jury he had no intention of driving the vehicle).
|
In Hertfordshire the Railway Police deal with all car crime in railway car parks. The local police do not get involved.
pmh (was peter)
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, Stuartli. It was between 10 and 12 years ago.
|
Hopefully DVD or some other sage will confrim, but I think it was the Road Traffic Act 1992 that expanded the sense of 'road' to cover these private but public areas
--
you have to get out of the car sometime
so visit www.mikes-walks.co.uk
|
When did parking attendents remit expand to include checking number plates?
I know they check tax.
What else can they issue tickects for?
JaB
|
Sorry, didn't explain fully.
It was a copper driving through the car-park who issued the ticket.
I was once given a telling-off by a policeman for having #ahem# additional lighting #ahem# whilst I sat in the car-park outside Bluewater M&S. Bluewater's a bit different because the roads seem to be "proper" roads with standard road signs and markings etc.
In fact, as I've now admitted to having undercar neons, I can tell the amusing story of how the old lady who lived next door once asked me if my car was faulty, because she had seen me drive off the night before, with "a funny blue light" under the car.
Now, I quite understand there are many people who have no knowledge at all of the workings of a motor car, but what on earth did she think could be faulty on a car, to cause it to emit a blue light from underneath?
Some sort of Govt. issue secret coolant?
|
Does the rule of law apply to the (often non-standard) traffic signs?
I ask because in my local Morrison's there are often people driving against the indicated one-way system.
|
|
|
I was once given a telling-off by a policeman for having #ahem# additional lighting #ahem# whilst I sat in the car-park outside Bluewater M&S. Bluewater's a bit different because the roads seem to be "proper" roads with standard road signs and markings etc.
I was about to embark on a motorcycle trip with friends from the Eurotunnel terminal last year. One member of the party decided to move his bike without wearing a helmet, and was promptly cautioned by Kent Police citing the 'public road' nature of the terminal car park.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, Stuartli. It was between 10 and 12 years ago.
Eh? Underbody neons disappeared 10 years ago? I didn't know they existed 10 years ago.
|
>>Eh? Underbody neons disappeared 10 years ago? I didn't know they existed 10 years ago.>>
You are referring to a oompletely different matter - note the postings' times - due to individual postings getting shunted around.
However, on the question of fancy lights being added to cars, in the early to mid-1990s (can't remember exact year) flashing light strips went on sale to various sections of a car.
The police quickly jumped on anyone using them because of vehicle lighting regulations and the craze soon died a death.
I remember it because, at the time, I did a story on the subject in collaboration with Lancashire Police's traffic department, after being sent a colour brochure detailing the various types of lights available.
Illustrations of cars equipped with various types of these lights made them resemble the local fairground after dark.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Did the carpark belong to Tesco? The "Asda carpark" in Carcroft near Doncaster actually belongs to Doncaster MBC, not Asda.
--
L'escargot by name, but not by nature.
|
This thread raises the issue of if the car park is treated as 'public road' then surely the owners of the car park have to treat it as such and ensure markings and signings comply! I would not mind betting that very few car parks have compliant signing and marking. Many supermarkets appear to have private contractors or employees who enforce clamping and parking restrictions which have very little in common with public places. Whilst enforcement of insurance, tax etc issues seems sensible it will be interesting to be told the strict legal position.
PS what applies to private unadopted roads? ( with or without private signs?)
pmh (was peter)
|
Public road/public carpark is defined as one that the general public have access to use.
eg, the locked and gated road to Lord Smythe's mannor is private, as is the staff only car park his servents use.
Road traffic law does not apply.
However, should Lord Smythe not have a gate on his approach road, the general public have access to this therefore a public road - enter the confusing world of (traffic) law.
***NEON LIGHTS***
Illegal if the light can be seen from the rear, as only red lights may be displayed from the rear of a vehicle, as defined by vehicle lighting regs (cant remember the year).
This also includes REFLECTIONS, which are obviously increased if the road is wet.
So why not have red neons? OK unless the light can be seen from the front - red lights MAY NOT be displayed on the front of a vehicle - also remember the reflections!!
This applies to red windscreen washers too.
Blue window washers are not illegal incidently, as RT law states forward facing lights should be yellow or white, not they MUST be yellow or white - hence blue tint headlamps.
As long as they dont flash(or move ie connected to the window wiper) that is - all forward facing lamps should be in a fixed position.
*****************************
car parks im pretty sure about,
lighting 100%.
|
Right Rob C here we go.
I doubt very much whether the local Authority will be responsbile for the upkeep and repair/resurfacing of the Tesco Car Park and this will fall on Tesco themselves. This is an important fact to establish in your case, because:
Regs 17 - 22 of Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing)Regs 1971 covered the size, shape and character of Registration Marks but these regs were revoked and replaced by Road Vehicles (Display of Registration Marks)2002. Any Regulation has to have the authority of an Act to be made and this Regulation was brought in under the Authority of Vehicles Excise and Registration Act 1994 Section 57 (power to make Regulations).
Now road is not defined under the 2002 Regs but it is at Sect 62 of the 1994 Act as:
" Public Road - In England means a road repairable at public expense" (Highways Authority/Local Council).
For offences against the Reg and Licencing Regs/Excise Act etc then this is the definition of road that has to be used and not under the Road Traffic Act/Highway Acts which have their own definition.That under the RT Act is much wider and can cover Insurance,fail to stop report,drink driving etc on a Tesco Car Park as a public place.
Suggest you write back to Fixed Penalty Office and point out the law that under the circumstance as the vehicle was stationary (no mention that it was driven of a RTA Road to get to its location), then no offence was committed at the location where it was parked when the ticket was issued beacuse the Car Park is not a Public road.
They may however point out and take the matter to Court that to get to the location seen then it must have been driven on a public road, which is another matter, but who can say that it was not brought in my trailer?
Worth a try in my book?
DVD
|
Blimey, now that's an impressive answer.
I'll pass it on, thankyou very much.
|
My local Tesco, the second or third biggest in the UK, owns and maintains its own (free) car park. Both the store and the car park have recently had many thousands of pounds spent on them to enhance and enlarge both facilities.
However, the Asda supermarket, established on land made available in the town centre, has a pay car park which is run and operated by the local council; traffic wardens patrol it and issue parking fines (substantial) if anyone goes over the time they have pre-paid to park.
Asda refunds the parking charge if you spend a certain amount or more but, to be honest, because of the hassle involved to visit the store I just don't bother going.
Many others, particularly visitors to the town, have made the same choice after being landed with a hefty parking fine.
Asda thus loses out in various ways. Its profits are reduced through refunding customers' parking fees, other people don't bother going like me and, when the store was being constructed, it had to meet council demands (blackmail?) to help improve the roads and other community facilities in the immediate area.
More and more councils these days are taking advantage of the opportunity provided, for example, through recent Road Traffic Acts to boost their financial coffers and, as usual, it's mostly the motorist who gets it in the neck.
However, the same council has recently come under fire because, for instance, private individuals improving their properties, perhaps to rent out, have started to face demands for up to several thousand pounds to help "improve the community."
This includes such things as planting trees (which is really the council's responsibility out of local council tax), yet even more annoying is that planting said trees or other improvements may not be in our town, but another area several miles away.
That's assuming, in the first place, that the money is actually used for said "community benefits."
No "community improvement" payment - no planning permission.
It stinks.
|
Sounds outrageous, almost corrupt, dare I say.
An appeal to the Secretary of State could swiftly reverse a refused application.
Well, maybe not "swiftly".
|
|
|
|
