Cycling UK Forum

orbiter wrote:It can be done, in the same way that normal parking tickets are issued to the car owner. This is explained (somewhat) at www.parking-appeals.gov.uk
which says that any local authority can ask to take local control of parking offences by FPNs, instead of the complication of a criminal offence. This includes "On street- Parked with one or more wheels on any part of an urban road other than a carriageway (footway parking)". Code 62 on your parking ticket.

It does need the local authority to deploy 'parking attendants' to enforce it but they at least have a financial incentive to do it and are easier to nag than the police.

Pete

The difference here is that the local authority police civil offences and the police police criminal offences. A civil offence does not require the full burden of proof as a criminal one, however this seems to have been modified in the case of speeding where the police do not seem to require the full burden of evidence. Why cannot this be extended to parking?

jocks wrote:

orbiter wrote:It can be done, in the same way that normal parking tickets are issued to the car owner. This is explained (somewhat) at www.parking-appeals.gov.uk
which says that any local authority can ask to take local control of parking offences by FPNs, instead of the complication of a criminal offence. This includes "On street- Parked with one or more wheels on any part of an urban road other than a carriageway (footway parking)". Code 62 on your parking ticket.

It does need the local authority to deploy 'parking attendants' to enforce it but they at least have a financial incentive to do it and are easier to nag than the police.

The difference here is that the local authority police civil offences and the police police criminal offences. A civil offence does not require the full burden of proof as a criminal one, however this seems to have been modified in the case of speeding where the police do not seem to require the full burden of evidence. Why cannot this be extended to parking?

The RTA 1991 (IIRR) decriminalises certain criminal parking offences and allows for LAs to 'police' them, as described in the link.

Pete

jocks wrote:Now, since you have rattled my cage, how do explain how speeding tickets work? The vehicle is gunned by a Gatso camera and the ticket is sent to the registered owner of the vehicle NOT the person who may have committed the offence. The owner is presumed guilty and that may not be the driver of the vehicle at the time. So why can that not be done with parked cars?

Jocks

For any criminal offence, i.e. one for which people are prosecuted there has to be somebody to prosecute. Offences committed by drivers of motor vehicles present an obvious problem of identification. To deal with that, in certain circumstances a senior police officer may require in writing the registered keeper to provide the details of the driver when an offence is alleged to have occurred.

This is a cumbersome procedure and it is always open to the reg keeper to say he does not know / cannot remember.

This is why a lot of parking offences have been moved over to tickets (fixed penalty notices.) Speeding detected by camera still works under the writing to the registered keeper system. Some pretty high profile people have avoided conviction by using the defence I mentioned and some other defences / AKA loopholes depending on your POV.*

Once the reg keeper has identified the driver, the FPT or summons (depending on the circumstances) is sent. If the reg. keeper fails to provide the info., they may be liable to prosecution for failing to provide the information.

I think it is unlikely that speeding would be made a civil matter in the same way as some parking offences because licence endorsement would go - you could speed so long as you could find the £££ for the occasional ticket. (I should say that all my experience relates to England and Wales only, although I believe road traffic law is similar in Scotland it is a separate and different system.)

*Unsuccessful attempts have been made to have the procedure declared unlawful by the European Human Rigfhts Court (infringes the right to silence) court ruled is was proportionate to the threat caused by drivers who offend.

jocks wrote:

pete75 wrote:

jocks wrote:Secondly, as I said the law is an ass. A criminal offence requires a criminal and therefore someone has to be held responsible. .

The law most certainly is not an ass over this. It's right and proper that the legal system has to prove that an indidual has comitted an offence for them to be punished for it.
What would you prefer - guilty until proven innocent.... That really would be an ass like system.

I frankly don't care

You don't care if the law was to assume someone is guilty until proven innocent?? You'd certainly care if, under such a system, you were accused of a crime of which you were innocent but couldn't prove that innocence.

pete75 wrote:

jocks wrote:

pete75 wrote:

jocks wrote:Secondly, as I said the law is an ass. A criminal offence requires a criminal and therefore someone has to be held responsible. .

The law most certainly is not an ass over this. It's right and proper that the legal system has to prove that an indidual has comitted an offence for them to be punished for it.
What would you prefer - guilty until proven innocent.... That really would be an ass like system.

I frankly don't care

You don't care if the law was to assume someone is guilty until proven innocent?? You'd certainly care if, under such a system, you were accused of a crime of which you were innocent but couldn't prove that innocence.

Welcome to the 21st Century mate. It shows you have not been paying attention. The "Innocent Until Proven Guilty" thing was shot down in flames with the Criminal Justice Act, along with the Trial By Press that we seem to be so fond of in the UK. As for the right to remain silent, well it is quite clear that you have not had a speeding ticket (neither have I FYI) but check this out:
http://www.abd.org.uk/righttosilence.htm
Or for that matter:
Sections 34-39, Public Order Act 1994 - England and Wales
Not forgetting, of course, that a British citizen can be extradited by the USA to spend a lovely holiday in Cuba at any time.

In the name of anti-terrorism or for the public good our rights and standards are being slowly erroded. I want to say right away that I fully support the police, I like what they do and they work under infuriating circumstances. I can see why Gene Hunt is a hero for those guys and in some ways it would be good to have someone like that around. But were are all being far too complacent, the laws that disperse kids from drinking in the parks, also stop us having a glass of wine on a sunny Saturday afternoon.

Parking enforcement by local authorities

For anybody interested in the subject this is a recently published traffic advisory leaflet (TAL) It relates only to England and Wales so no use to Jocks I'm afraid.

tc, that's a sad read

Parking a heavy goods vehicle (HGV) on the footway contravenes section 19 of
the Road Traffic Act 1988 and can be enforced by a Civil Enforcement Officer
in a CEA. Pavement parking by all motorised vehicles is banned throughout
London (except where expressly permitted) and in some other parts of England
by local Acts of Parliament. In these circumstances the ban does not need to
be signed but compliance may be better if it is. Any authority may introduce a
ban on pavement parking in a CEA with a TRO and their CEOs may enforce
it. Such a ban must be indicated with traffic signs authorised by DfT.

as it seems to imply that pavement parking by non-HGVs is legal unless specifically prohibited!

Pete

orbiter wrote: it seems to imply that pavement parking by non-HGVs is legal unless specifically prohibited!

Almost right but not quite (as I see it.) It is only specifically prohibited where specifically prohibited, but that does not necessarily make it legal. It may still be an unnecessary obstruction (i.e. illegal) but for all the reasons set out earlier that is difficult to enforce and rarely is enforced.

I think the message is this: If a local authority wants to prohibit footway parking they now have the power and legislative framework to do it.