Illegal “ No Motor caravan signs”

[Oldrat]

I recently read a post about a council which had been using these signs, (similar to my attachment) but were challenged and subsequently found by the ombudsman to be illegal as they were not prescribed signs as required by legislation.
.

Can anyone assist me find the post please?

 

[gus-lopez]

I vaguley remember that but have no idea who made the post/thread?

 

[irnbru]

Not quite the same sign but I made a post in 2020

https://www.motorhomefun.co.uk/forum/threads/so-i’m-still-a-little-confused-%E2%80%8D♂%EF%B8%8F.222259/#post-3962232

 

[Tea Bag]

Hi.
Legal or not,i would not park up anywhere a sign like that is showing. Somebody somewhere doesn't want Mo/ho's there.
Tea Bag.

 

[Oldrat]

Nor would I, so thanks for your contribution Tea bag, but not particularly helpful on this occasion.

I’m trying to retrace the incident. I’m sure that it was in East Sussex, and the driver appealed the ticket. The Ombudsman was very clear that the signs the council were using prolifically were illegal.
lt has it has huge significance if you’ve already been ticketed and have paid up.

It has a couple of aspects to it which I’d like to bottom out.

1) the legality of it. Councils can’t just take the cash in without getting it right.

2) I’m interested in the “Motor caravan” definition. The DVLA insist that I drive a van with windows, and it is not a Motor caravan. They can’t have their cake and eat it.

I’ll enquire elsewhere,

Thanks for looking

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Badknee]

2) I’m interested in the “Motor caravan” definition. The DVLA insist that I drive a van with windows, and it is not a Motor caravan. They can’t have their cake and eat it.

Good point Oldrat I hope your successful in your search.

 

[Tonks]

Nor would I, so thanks for your contribution Tea bag, but not particularly helpful on this occasion.

I’m trying to retrace the incident. I’m sure that it was in East Sussex, and the driver appealed the ticket. The Ombudsman was very clear that the signs the council were using prolifically were illegal.
lt has it has huge significance if you’ve already been ticketed and have paid up.

It has a couple of aspects to it which I’d like to bottom out.

1) the legality of it. Councils can’t just take the cash in without getting it right.

2) I’m interested in the “Motor caravan” definition. The DVLA insist that I drive a van with windows, and it is not a Motor caravan. They can’t have their cake and eat it.

I’ll enquire elsewhere,

Thanks for looking

In terms of point 2, when I looked into this some time ago relating to changes in some car parks on the south coast, the council's T&C's - which anyone buying a ticket or using their car parks are subject to - stated that 'Motor caravan' on their signage means 'any vehicle adapted for sleeping', and the DVLA classification on a V5 was therefore completely irrelevant in their car parks.

 

[Southdowners]

I think I remember a fairly recent post where someone posted a photo of a sign which said something about a vehicle with ‘cooking facilities’. Someone had amended the sign to read no cocking by putting white tape on one of the o’s.

Said sign was quite obviously not an official one whereas the one you’ve posted looks as though it is.

You need to find out what the local council deems to be a ‘motor caravan’ as the DVLA categorisation of your vehicle isn’t applicable in this instance.

 

[Raul]

Not much of help, but I remember few videos on YouTube where ppl posted to help make the difference between legit sing a and non compliant. The one in your opening post it’s illegal. When council puts a sign and the council logo is missing, it’s not legit. Only if they put their logo and description as I understood it they can enforce it. Signs without logo no. They have no authority to put signs without highway approvals.
Worth trying black belt barrister Chanel on YouTube.

 

[Spriddler]

I've noticed that in France official signs frequently include the legislative reference number and date that applies to restrictions.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[gpat]

They are not illegal. The worst they can be is unenforceable.

 

[Oldrat]

I have found the answer in part.


In April 2022, the Adjudicator, Andrew Barfoot made a decision on two parking tickets for a motorhome allegedly contravening these signs in Shoreham.

The appeal was against Worthing district council who put up the signs.

I attach Mr Barfoot’s findings dismissing the tickets on the basis that the signs are not permitted by the Traffic signs regulations and general directions 2016, and therefore cannot restrict motorhome parking.

I attach a copy of the full adjudication.

FOOTNOTE
1) This was correct in April 2022, the council MAY since have taken steps to legalise these songs by way of exemption from the sec of state.

2) Generally, I wouldn’t really want to park somewhere where I wasn’t really wanted, it was more about the principle.


Many thanks to Ben at BRBF for his assistance.

 

[DDJC]

I have found the answer in part.


In April 2022, the Adjudicator, Andrew Barfoot made a decision on two parking tickets for a motorhome allegedly contravening these signs in Shoreham.

The appeal was against Worthing district council who put up the signs.

I attach Mr Barfoot’s findings dismissing the tickets on the basis that the signs are not permitted by the Traffic signs regulations and general directions 2016, and therefore cannot restrict motorhome parking.

I attach a copy of the full adjudication.

FOOTNOTE
1) This was correct in April 2022, the council MAY since have taken steps to legalise these songs by way of exemption from the sec of state.

2) Generally, I wouldn’t really want to park somewhere where I wasn’t really wanted, it was more about the principle.


Many thanks to Ben at BRBF for his assistance.



View attachment 687190View attachment 687191View attachment 687192

Always like to see a district council lose a decision, especially anti-Motorhome and parking decisions. Stupid idiots don't realise that motorhomers also vote, and there is plenty of them.

Would just say that if he wanted to redact his name from the paper, Mr Neil Yeo should have used a permanent marker rather than a highlighter pen.

 

[SpeedyDux]

Reasons 5, 6, and 7 are the key ones, if any Funster needs to challenge a Council Penalty Charge Notice in similar circumstances.

Well done Oldrat

 

[TDub49]

Yawn . . if anyone is really that interested, try getting your brains around this

The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016

This Instrument consolidates, with substantial amendments, the Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Pedestrian Crossings Regulations and General Directions 1997, the Traffic Signs (Temporary Obstructions) Regulations 1997, the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 and the School Crossing...

www.legislation.gov.uk

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Rapido925M]

Always like to see a district council lose a decision, especially anti-Motorhome and parking decisions. Stupid idiots don't realise that motorhomers also vote, and there is plenty of them.

Would just say that if he wanted to redact his name from the paper, Mr Neil Yeo should have used a permanent marker rather than a highlighter pen.

He could also have read comment number 1 more carefully

Gordon

 

[Southdowners]

The signs relate to parking in Marine Drive in Worthing, not Shoreham - from the info Oldrat provided it appears that Shoreham is where the meeting was held.

I know the area along Marine Drive and to be honest some of the motorhomes parked there were not doing themselves any favours in terms of gaining approval for parking. Motorhomes are parked alongside the green with windbreaks positioned on three sides adjacent to the motorhome so as to make private grassed areas. That might be OK if it were just a few vehicles but masses of motorhomes parked for days on end puts people's backs up. I don't live in the area by the way... so no agenda.

I don't know if you can park MHs there now or not but I wouldn't as I think it's a bit selfish to do so. If it were a less densly populated area of the country then I guess it wouldn't be an issue but finding a parking space in Sussex is a challenge in itself, even in a car.

 

[Silver-Fox]

Just because a Council puts up what looks like an enforceable sign doesn’t mean it is.

Where we used to live Cheltenham BC took it upon themselves to put signage up prohibiting the parking of vehicles on grass verges.

The grass verge is part of the highway and so are footpaths.
The Council had no jurisdiction over said verges.

As far as I know it’s only parts of London have by laws preventing the parking of a vehicle on a footpath.

The Police can issue a ticket for obstruction in England if you park on a footpath.

But if there are parking restrictions on the road and you park on the footpath you are bound by those restrictions.

Slight off topic and hope I’m still correct in my post

 

[gpat]

Believe me the grass verge is not always park of the highway. I agree it normally is, but ownership cab be complex. I know. We always lay water mains in the verge if we can. Often we can't as it's owned by the property that abuts the highway and in some cases owned by neither.

 

[Silver-Fox]

Believe me the grass verge is not always park of the highway. I agree it normally is,

If it’s not part of the highway and part of a house curtilage.
The council have no durisdiction to put signs up anyway then.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Orion]

Just because a Council puts up what looks like an enforceable sign doesn’t mean it is.

Where we used to live Cheltenham BC took it upon themselves to put signage up prohibiting the parking of vehicles on grass verges.

The grass verge is part of the highway and so are footpaths.
The Council had no jurisdiction over said verges.

As far as I know it’s only parts of London have by laws preventing the parking of a vehicle on a footpath.

The Police can issue a ticket for obstruction in England if you park on a footpath.

But if there are parking restrictions on the road and you park on the footpath you are bound by those restrictions.

Slight off topic and hope I’m still correct in my post

Agree with all you say, but things might change sooner rather than later. If you’re looking for something to do have a read of this:

Pavement Parking - Options for Change

 

[ivorantony]

deleted

 

[gpat]

If it’s not part of the highway and part of a house curtilage.
The council have no durisdiction to put signs up anyway then.

True enough. But then you would be trespassing wouldn't you?

 

[Silver-Fox]

Agree with all you say, but things might change sooner rather than later. If you’re looking for something to do have a read of this:

Pavement Parking - Options for Change

If local authorities are given the powers to use PCNs for pavement parking gods help anyone that lives in narrow streets.

It will be a nice revenue generator for the authorities.

 

[nicholsong]

They are not illegal. The worst they can be is unenforceable.

I had thought of making this distinction, which is correct, but I refrained because I thought that I might be accused of being a pedantic lawyer - even though I think that is what we lawyers are paid to be.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Verteuil Man]

It is very similar to roadmarkings. Double and single yellow lines are not legal unless they have a termination tab line on the end (makes it into a tee). Double lines in the centre of the road are not legal unless they have ^ reflecting roadstuds" in the middle of them. That is the legal bit but the "spirit" of the markings is still there. Its something that Mr Loophole knows about.

 

[Silver-Fox]

True enough. But then you would be trespassing wouldn't you?

Not if it was your house.

The C B C did it in a residential area where you didn’t get “passing parkers”

But I take your point.

 

[Silver-Fox]

Double and single yellow lines are not legal unless they have a termination tab line on the end (makes it into a tee)

There was a case a few years ago where a motorist went to court over the above point and “broken” lines.


The judge flounder against the motorist as they should have understood “spirit” of the lines etc.

No idea if the motorist appealed the judgement though.

Strange things happen

 

[gpat]

It is very similar to roadmarkings. Double and single yellow lines are not legal unless they have a termination tab line on the end (makes it into a tee). Double lines in the centre of the road are not legal unless they have ^ reflecting roadstuds" in the middle of them. That is the legal bit but the "spirit" of the markings is still there. Its something that Mr Loophole knows about.

I wouldn't want to put any of those to the test though.

 

[Oldrat]

Always like to see a district council lose a decision, especially anti-Motorhome and parking decisions.

I’ve worked for several local authorities.

In one, the legal department was so appalling that they managed to secure an Anti Social Behaviour Order for a gent who caused all sorts or trouble.


But the ASBO contained a double negative, the wording of the restriction carried over onto the following page and read..

You must not …
… not be drunk in XXX area

So it was the only ASBO ever issued that required a person to be drunk if he entered in a certain place.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}