Parking tickets on private dead end lane

[sioux94]

I have recently started a new job and found that I could park in the short 'dead-end' lane on the side of the building.

This is in glasgow.

A colleague has been parking in the lane for years and has had a few parking tickets.

However, she has a lawyer and is refusing to pay the fines.

This is because, although there are double yellow lines, it is a lane owned by the railway and not the council.

The council, or anyone, do not maintain this lane.

It is possibly about 150 years old and is cobblestoned so would probably cost a fortune to maintain.

 

I have spoken to several traffic wardens when they walk down the lane to inspect our cars.

One told me he was told not to touch the lane as it was private.

Another said he would not give us a ticket ever but to be careful.

Another one told me to move the car as she would give me a ticket for potentially obstructing fire engines!!

 

I can think of a thousand streets where fire engines can not drive down as they are too narrow etc so I dont see why this is an issue in this case.

 

I have checked the law on obstruction and I believe that the only way you can be ticketed for causing an obstruction is if it is a through road onto another highway.

 

Meanwhile, a cafe owner next to our workplace decided to get himself a pot of white paint and paint parking bays for two cars which cover the yellow lines.

 

The concerned fire hazard traffic warden told me this was being investigated and they were in trouble for painting the lines.

However, she was unable to give them a parking ticket because she couldnt see the yellow lines.

 

So I said I would paint white the yellow lines where I park and she said this wasnt a good idea.

 

I dont know if the road is adopted or has a TRO on it but I will ring the council tomorrow to check this.

 

Anyone any suggestions about why there is such confusion in this dead end lane!

[dx100uk]

the clue is the words on their 'tickets':

 

the only ones that need paying are the ones from

police/council wardens

these will say on them:

 

PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE

 

and ONLY THOSE THREE EXACT WORDS.

 

all others will be speculative invoices

and can be safely ignored

 

dx

[firstclassx]

If the lane is "owned" by the Railway, then the Railway Byelaws (S219 Transport Act 2000) apply.

 

Byelaw 14 is most relevant.

 

A copy of the Byelaws are available here

 

Byelaw breaches are dealt with in a Magistrate's Court as a criminal offence via summons.

 

If the vehicle is blocking access or is a general hinderance, or an obstruction, a criminal offence is committed - Byelaw 14(2).

Edited June 16, 2012 by firstclassx

[dx100uk]

only if the ticket is issued by the land owner not any trumpetted uy private company

 

this has been debated saveral times before

 

why do you keep bringing it up.?

 

what you are saying it not true,

 

dx

[firstclassx]

You are wrong!

 

An authorised person can enforce the Railway Byelaws. An authorized person can work ON BEHALF OF the Operator (Land Owner).

 

The Railway Byelaws contain an "interpretative" section:

 

 

“authorised person” means:

(i) a person acting in the course of his duties who:

(a) is an employee or agent of an Operator, or

(b) any other person authorised by an Operator, or

(ii) any constable, acting in the execution of his duties upon or in connection with the railway;

 

You should pay particular attention to "agent of an operator" and "any other person authorized by an Operator".

 

Incidentally, I didn't mention anything about parking tickets, either! So don't know why you even posted! I even elaborated that it would be dealt with via Summons!

 

A prosecution would occur if it was pursued, (unless an out of court settlement was reached).

Edited June 16, 2012 by firstclassx

[crem]

You are wrong!

 

An authorised person can enforce the Railway Byelaws. An authorized person can work ON BEHALF OF the Operator (Land Owner).

 

So you keep saying. But what you keep getting corrected on is that while the "agent" may be able to issue on behalf of the railway under byelaw 14, they can't pick and choose what they are pursuing and change their mind half way through.

 

i.e. if they are claiming breach of byelaw, they should do so on the original ticket. If they are claiming breach of contract with a PPC for parking on DYL, or overstaying a parking time, they can't send out a speculative invoice, then 2 months later decide to make it a byelaw issue coz they haven't been paid yet!!

[firstclassx]

So you keep saying. But what you keep getting corrected on is that while the "agent" may be able to issue on behalf of the railway under byelaw 14, they can't pick and choose what they are pursuing and change their mind half way through.

 

i.e. if they are claiming breach of byelaw, they should do so on the original ticket. If they are claiming breach of contract with a PPC for parking on DYL, or overstaying a parking time, they can't send out a speculative invoice, then 2 months later decide to make it a byelaw issue coz they haven't been paid yet!!

 

Just because it appears unfair, doesn't mean they can't do it. There is absolutely no requirement to state the Byelaw, except for executing Byelaw 23(2).

 

It happens all the time and is common within the rail industry. In fact, it is not uncommon for a TOC to issue both civil and criminal proceedings for the same offence. (i.e. civil proceedings to recover compensation for an unpaid fare, criminal proceedings to prosecute for fare evasion).

 

Take for example imagine you've been issued a Penalty Fare of £20 for not having a ticket by G4S Security, who are authorised persons for EazyRail Train Operating Company Ltd. If you've been issued a Penalty Fare, you will have actually of breached Byelaw 18, but in lieu of prosecution, paying the £20 "penalty" can resolve the matter without the need to attend court/be convicted etc.

 

At the end of the Authorised Persons shift, he submits his report to the people he is acting on behalf of, EazyRail.

 

However, you decide you don't think you should pay the £20 Penalty for whatever reason. The Train Operating Company (or their agent), waits for 21 days for you to pay up. However, you don't pay up. The TOC then decides to cancel the Penalty Fare Notice and commence Byelaw 18 proceedings against you as you didn't follow their method of alternative disposal. You realise the potential for a conviction, and ask the TOC for mercy. They agree to drop the case for the original £20 Penalty Fare, plus an administrative penalty/costs of £100. If you don't pay it, they take you to court, and judge praises TOC for attempting to dispose of the matter outside of court.

 

If you read the "Public Transport" thread, you'll see this happens day in, day out.

 

I work within a Prosecutions Department within a TOC, and a lot of people do not realise the vast array of powers that exist surrounding the railway. For simple Byelaw breaches, (misuse of escalators etc), first offence, I usually offer a £75 "administrative penalty" and condition that they sign and return an internal reprimand to prevent my TOC from laying an information at the local mags. Some choose to pay £75, but refuse to sign the rep on advice of their solicitor etc. Their £75 is refunded and they invariably end up pleading not guilty to a strict liability offence. Their solicitor offers mitigation, but it bears no consequence to proving the offence. Found Guilty. Usually fined, record sent to NPS, costs, £15 VS, sometimes a Banning Order or other similar order made.

 

Back to the parking, it is really simple:

 

1) Offer a civil disposal - pay penalty notice or progress case.

2) Withdraw offer of civil disposal and lay an information for breach of byelaw.

3) Summonsed & Court Case

 

There is nothing to prevent you from taking action in both courts, later choosing to only go one way!

[dx100uk]

yet again...same rubbish what you posted last time.

 

what happens with fare evasion is nothing to do with PRIVATE PARKING SPECVULATIVE INVOICES..

 

list a case thats been to court on this rather than repeating your 'thoughts'

 

and to be CLEAR

 

this is where a PRIVATE PARKING COMPANY i'e parking eye

have taken and PROSECUTED someone for a RAILWAYS BYELAW...

.......

 

still waiting after asking last time.

 

dx

 

 

 

dx

[firstclassx]

But the OP has had nothing to do with a PPC! You keep bringing it up! My point I keep trying to make is that you can't keep advising people that a Byelaw 14 prosecution will never occur! Nothing the OP has said has indicated that a PPC is involved. I was merely stating originally that it was not impossible for a conviction to occur.

 

That said, Merseyrail contract Carlisle Security to do their Byelaw work. When it comes to parking, they will issue a Penalty Parking Ticket. The authorised representative will then write a statement of witness and forward a small bundle to the Merseyrail Prosecution Office.

 

Here is a "Statement of Fact", which goes to show a Byelaw 14 prosecution can occur. Northern Rail use a company called G4S for Byelaw Enforcement, with Northern's in-house prosecutor doing the rest.

 

[My point is that Carlisle Security or g4s could easily be Meteor or similar]

 

 

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/812/statementoffactswashed.jpg

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/231/pict0913l.jpg

 

 

I will re-edit the post on Monday when I have access to a few more comprehensive documents to upload.

 

In addition to the above, East Coast (a TOC), describe that RPSS deal with the administration of their scheme

 

 

Out of interest, do you admit that the OP has the POTENTIAL to be issued with a Byelaw 14 summons by a bona-fida Train Operating Company (not via a PPC) who believes his vehicle is a hinderance???

Edited June 16, 2012 by firstclassx

[freakyleaky]

[/b]..

 

list a case thats been to court on this rather than repeating your 'thoughts'

 

 

 

dx

 

It's not going to happen DX.

[dx100uk]

and what has the op's thread got to do with railway byelaws!

 

dx

 

Penalty parking ticket ... = speculative invoice!

[Tony P]

I think we have here someone who probably is well versed in his job (prosecuting people who, by mistake, got on an earler, empty train instead of waiting for the later full one, or falling asleep and missing their destination - etc) trying to superimpose that knowledge to a completely different area of Law and circumstances.

 

The common, but tenuous, link possibly being the possibility of Choo-Choos nearby.

[firstclassx]

The OP said the "railway" owned the land! If that is true, then the Railway Byelaws apply to the private land.

 

it is a lane owned by the railway

[firstclassx]

It's not going to happen DX.

 

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/812/statementoffactswashed.jpg/

[dx100uk]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?336202-meteor-parking-ticket-(southeastern-ashford-kent)&p=3839912#post3839912

 

but this thread is NOTHING to do with railways anyhow but as its been hi-jacked.

 

dx