Interesting 62 ? Options

[Neil B]

Approx GSV
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5610572,0.0...6384!8i8192

Zip berk by Neil Black, on Flickr

Zip plonker by Neil Black, on Flickr

DYs went live October as part of an LTN. ETO >> Montague Road.
https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/3648920

Notwithstanding the ambiguity from ineffective removal of the bays I'm not sure that an ETO can alone remove those bays.
Would they not have to first rescind whatever council resolution allowed 2 up parking?

Edit. PCN was for two up, not the DY.


This post has been edited by Neil B: Sat, 16 Jan 2021 - 14:38

[Advertisement]

[Gerfc1]

I would say that is conflicting of regulation.

When someone would see a white dotted markings then they would assume it is place for parking.

[PASTMYBEST]

IMO a resolution must by made by the council members and can only be rescinded in the same way if indeed it can be rescinded at all nothing in the regs allows for that, but no doubt some local government act would. so if the resolution is still in force the 2 up parking cannot be subject to a 62. I would also argue that if the bay's are there a motorist is entitled to assume they should park within them

[cp8759]

IMO a resolution must by made by the council members and can only be rescinded in the same way if indeed it can be rescinded at all nothing in the regs allows for that, but no doubt some local government act would.

Almost, section 14 of the Interpretation Act 1978 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/30/section/14

Implied power to amend.

Where an Act confers power to make—

(a) rules, regulations or byelaws; or
(b) Orders in Council, orders or other subordinate legislation to be made by statutory instrument,

it implies, unless the contrary intention appears, a power, exercisable in the same manner and subject to the same conditions or limitations, to revoke, amend or re-enact any instrument made under the power.

So the resolution can be removed only by means of a further resolution.

[DancingDad]

I can't get beyond the interesting bit of parking, straddling DYLs.
What was the guy thinking?

Good chance the PCN can be cancelled if the council are put to the test on resolutions but I struggle the moment I see someone parked on DYLs to think that signage may have misled, even if the two should never be used together.

[The Rookie]

I can't get beyond the interesting bit of parking, straddling DYLs.
What was the guy thinking?

Probably thinking he was parking inside the bay markings.

[Neil B]

I agree with you Pete but I do like to counter the outpouring of utter tripe in local facebook groups who are busy
querying his driving licence, lol.

Says he is a former Central London delivery driver??

Bigger problem at the mo is that ZipCar haven't transferred liability -- useless as ever.

[DancingDad]

I agree with you Pete but I do like to counter the outpouring of utter tripe in local facebook groups who are busy
querying his driving licence, lol...........

To me it is instinctive when parking.... not only because of the time I've spent on the council forum but because where I can park was drummed into me when I was learning to drive.
And was one of the questions the examiner asked so I assume was a common one that the local driving instructors knew was likely to be asked.
I see a double yellow, a bus stop, a dropped kerb, zig zags etc and my first thought is nope, find somewhere else.
Many we see on the council forum obviously didn't have the same instilled, never learnt or don't care anyway.

If I saw that combination of signs, my instinct would be WTF but I still would not park there, I have this aversion to fighting my own PCNs when they are easily avoidable.

[Neil B]

To me it is instinctive when parking.... not only because of the time I've spent on the council forum

Forum has given me a lot. Amongst the things I've learnt >>

The real law for box junctions

That I can't stop at bus stops, even though it previously seemed the ideal place

The real rules on the loading exemption

The boarding/alighting exemption, especially assisted.

That zig zags only apply to the carriageway.

That yellow lines apply to the whole highway.

and, like yourself, not to go picking a fight over a PCN that I could do without.

[PASTMYBEST]

I agree with you Pete but I do like to counter the outpouring of utter tripe in local facebook groups who are busy
querying his driving licence, lol.

Says he is a former Central London delivery driver??

Bigger problem at the mo is that ZipCar haven't transferred liability -- useless as ever.

might be an idea to prompt zipcar before it's to late

[Neil B]

might be an idea to prompt zipcar before it's to late

That's all I've said to him, as well as referring him here.

A few other responses seemed aware of ZipCar's antics.

Imho transfer of liability should be made mandatory, as well as a limit on admin charges by hire/lease cos.

[PASTMYBEST]

I have a case will dig it out where zipcar were told they could not transfer liability as they do not hold the position of owner that it seems is avis

Don't know if they updated things based on that ruling or just decided they will pay and pass on a contractual charge

This post has been edited by PASTMYBEST: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 - 23:30