Today's most viewed
Driver fined for parking on verge - but neighbours are allowed to
 |
| FIXED PENALTY: Car owner David Keyworth. |
A CHANDLER'S Ford resident says he is paying the price for living in the wrong part of his street.
David Keyworth is having to cough up £70 after parking two wheels of his car on the verge outside his home in Bodycoats Road.
He was unaware that the section outside his house was covered by an Eastleigh Council order banning parking on verges. But if he had driven a few hundred yards down the road he could have parked on the verge without fear of getting a ticket.
Mr Keyworth, a 57-year-old computer systems worker, believes it is a money grabbing exercise targeted at motorists.
He is now appealing against the penalty.
He said "I am not anti-council and I am not in favour of people parking willy nilly.
"But the order does not cover the borough. It does not even cover the whole of my street!
"If they want to protect verges they should do it across the borough. The council cannot be allowed to bring in orders like this where unsuspecting members of the public can be caught completely unawares.
"There are no road markings to draw a motorist's attention to the restrictions and the signs on the lamposts are very small and are hidden by trees.
"A driver could drive most of the length of the road and see cars parked with wheels off the road and decide to follow suit.
"Apparently this order covers a selection of streets scattered throughout the borough of Eastleigh. But the public will be left utterly in the dark about where they are. Unless they are clever enough to get a copy of the order and carry it around with them at all times."
Mr Keyworth said the ticket was put on his car at 6.45pm on a Friday.
He said: "It is surprising that they have got the money to enforce this at this time of night."
He added: "The verges around my home are devoid of grass, not because of parking but because the council has failed every year to clear up huge quantities of leaves from highway trees that kill off the grass."
An Eastleigh Council spokes-man said: "The bright yellow signs identifying the restrictions meet the standards set down by the Department For Transport.
"The council introduced the restriction following complaints from residents in this part of Bodycoats Road and inspections revealed that the verges were badly damaged. Each restriction requires a traffic order and signs. It would be impractical to cover the whole borough. Each of the local area committees are currently looking at problems areas and introducing restrictions where there is the greatest need."
7:34am Thursday 8th May 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: Stupid question I know on 8:36am Thu 8 May 08
"David Keyworth is having to cough up £70 after parking two wheels of his car on the verge outside his home in Bodycoats Road."
What's wrong with parking it on the road where it belongs?
"David Keyworth is having to cough up £70 after parking two wheels of his car on the verge outside his home in Bodycoats Road."
What's wrong with parking it on the road where it belongs?
Posted by: Denzil on 8:39am Thu 8 May 08
"An Eastleigh Council spokes-man said: "The bright yellow signs identifying the restrictions meet the standards set down by the Department For Transport."
If Mr Keyworth is having trouble understanding these "bright yellow signs" he should seriously consider giving up driving or be made to retake his driving test.
Silly attention seeker.
"An Eastleigh Council spokes-man said: "The bright yellow signs identifying the restrictions meet the standards set down by the Department For Transport."
If Mr Keyworth is having trouble understanding these "bright yellow signs" he should seriously consider giving up driving or be made to retake his driving test.
Silly attention seeker.
Posted by: hulla, baloo on 8:42am Thu 8 May 08
[quote][bold]Denzil[/bold] wrote:
"An Eastleigh Council spokes-man said: "The bright yellow signs identifying the restrictions meet the standards set down by the Department For Transport." If Mr Keyworth is having trouble understanding these "bright yellow signs" he should seriously consider giving up driving or be made to retake his driving test. Silly attention seeker.[/quote] This paragraph in the story is a possible explanation.
""There are no road markings to draw a motorist's attention to the restrictions and the signs on the lamposts are very small and are hidden by trees.
Denzil wrote:
"An Eastleigh Council spokes-man said: "The bright yellow signs identifying the restrictions meet the standards set down by the Department For Transport." If Mr Keyworth is having trouble understanding these "bright yellow signs" he should seriously consider giving up driving or be made to retake his driving test. Silly attention seeker.
This paragraph in the story is a possible explanation.
""There are no road markings to draw a motorist's attention to the restrictions and the signs on the lamposts are very small and are hidden by trees.
Posted by: sue, Southampton on 8:46am Thu 8 May 08
It would be nice if Southampton acted as well to stop people parking on pavements. However Southampton cares nothing for pedestrians.
It would be nice if Southampton acted as well to stop people parking on pavements. However Southampton cares nothing for pedestrians.
Posted by: Denzil on 8:47am Thu 8 May 08
[quote][bold]hulla[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Denzil[/bold] wrote: "An Eastleigh Council spokes-man said: "The bright yellow signs identifying the restrictions meet the standards set down by the Department For Transport." If Mr Keyworth is having trouble understanding these "bright yellow signs" he should seriously consider giving up driving or be made to retake his driving test. Silly attention seeker.[/quote] This paragraph in the story is a possible explanation. ""There are no road markings to draw a motorist's attention to the restrictions and the signs on the lamposts are very small and are hidden by trees.[/quote] but "meet the standards set down by the Department For Transport".
This attention seeker needs to take the matter up with his MP and the DfT.
hulla wrote:
Denzil wrote: "An Eastleigh Council spokes-man said: "The bright yellow signs identifying the restrictions meet the standards set down by the Department For Transport." If Mr Keyworth is having trouble understanding these "bright yellow signs" he should seriously consider giving up driving or be made to retake his driving test. Silly attention seeker.
This paragraph in the story is a possible explanation. ""There are no road markings to draw a motorist's attention to the restrictions and the signs on the lamposts are very small and are hidden by trees.
but "meet the standards set down by the Department For Transport".
This attention seeker needs to take the matter up with his MP and the DfT.
Posted by: hulla, baloo on 8:51am Thu 8 May 08
[quote][bold]Denzil[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]hulla[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]Denzil[/bold] wrote: "An Eastleigh Council spokes-man said: "The bright yellow signs identifying the restrictions meet the standards set down by the Department For Transport." If Mr Keyworth is having trouble understanding these "bright yellow signs" he should seriously consider giving up driving or be made to retake his driving test. Silly attention seeker.[/quote] This paragraph in the story is a possible explanation. ""There are no road markings to draw a motorist's attention to the restrictions and the signs on the lamposts are very small and are hidden by trees.[/quote] but "meet the standards set down by the Department For Transport". This attention seeker needs to take the matter up with his MP and the DfT.[/quote] Assuming the trees are trimmed on a regular basis, which I doubt due to council cutbacks, and do not obscure the signs.
I agree, take up with MP, take photographs and let them take him to court.
Denzil wrote:
hulla wrote: Denzil wrote: "An Eastleigh Council spokes-man said: "The bright yellow signs identifying the restrictions meet the standards set down by the Department For Transport." If Mr Keyworth is having trouble understanding these "bright yellow signs" he should seriously consider giving up driving or be made to retake his driving test. Silly attention seeker.
This paragraph in the story is a possible explanation. ""There are no road markings to draw a motorist's attention to the restrictions and the signs on the lamposts are very small and are hidden by trees.
but "meet the standards set down by the Department For Transport". This attention seeker needs to take the matter up with his MP and the DfT.
Assuming the trees are trimmed on a regular basis, which I doubt due to council cutbacks, and do not obscure the signs.
I agree, take up with MP, take photographs and let them take him to court.
Posted by: DSM, Winchester on 9:02am Thu 8 May 08
What's wrong with him parking his car on his own driveway?
What's wrong with him parking his car on his own driveway?
Posted by: Rabble Rouser, Bodycoates Road on 9:08am Thu 8 May 08
Maybe if this man parked on the road the council workers would be able to get to the trees to cut them back thus enabling people to read the signs. How can this man complain about getting a fine for clearly breaking the bylaw? Perhaps he should use his drive in future, or better still park on the road and not ruin the grass verge.
Maybe if this man parked on the road the council workers would be able to get to the trees to cut them back thus enabling people to read the signs. How can this man complain about getting a fine for clearly breaking the bylaw? Perhaps he should use his drive in future, or better still park on the road and not ruin the grass verge.
Posted by: Christoff on 9:14am Thu 8 May 08
I reckon he has a good chance of getting it waived. I have challenged on a similar basis and been successful. Ignorance of the law is no excuse but the signage is the main issue, if it is not clearly identified he will have a good chance. I hope he has taken good photo evidence of the signs covered by the trees.
Hope he sticks it to 'em.
The time the ticket was issued idicates how petty and desperate they are...weasels
I reckon he has a good chance of getting it waived. I have challenged on a similar basis and been successful. Ignorance of the law is no excuse but the signage is the main issue, if it is not clearly identified he will have a good chance. I hope he has taken good photo evidence of the signs covered by the trees.
Hope he sticks it to 'em.
The time the ticket was issued idicates how petty and desperate they are...weasels
Posted by: BB, WEST End on 9:46am Thu 8 May 08
Pay up and shut up! Well done Eastleigh, they have to start somewhere in protecting the verges. The car should be entirely on the road or in a driveway. The audacity of the man!!
Pay up and shut up! Well done Eastleigh, they have to start somewhere in protecting the verges. The car should be entirely on the road or in a driveway. The audacity of the man!!
Posted by: l, Chandler's Ford on 10:12am Thu 8 May 08
Fair enough if there were no signs it does seem a bit unfair. However, the law is the law and I was led to believe that no-one could park two wheels on pavements/verges at any time - quite right too, it damages the verge, obstructs pededstrians/prams and doesn't free up any usable space on the road for cars to pass each other.
Fair enough if there were no signs it does seem a bit unfair. However, the law is the law and I was led to believe that no-one could park two wheels on pavements/verges at any time - quite right too, it damages the verge, obstructs pededstrians/prams and doesn't free up any usable space on the road for cars to pass each other.
Posted by: jimbo, Southampton on 10:18am Thu 8 May 08
Incredibly bizzare that whichever traffic warden who issued this was 1) patrolling a fairly quiet residential street (unless someone had specifically complained about an ongoing problem) and 2) knew these bye laws or whatever they are in such detail as to pick out this car for a ticket. Why bother? You just get yourself in the paper
Incredibly bizzare that whichever traffic warden who issued this was 1) patrolling a fairly quiet residential street (unless someone had specifically complained about an ongoing problem) and 2) knew these bye laws or whatever they are in such detail as to pick out this car for a ticket. Why bother? You just get yourself in the paper
Posted by: sparky wilts, here on 10:33am Thu 8 May 08
Obviously this idiots view is keep death off the road drive on the pavement.Pay up and shut up.
Obviously this idiots view is keep death off the road drive on the pavement.Pay up and shut up.
Posted by: reallyboredofdenzil.
com, chilworth on 10:54am Thu 8 May 08
surely it must be time for denzil to get a job and a life, you are just so boring and would argue that black is white.
surely it must be time for denzil to get a job and a life, you are just so boring and would argue that black is white.
Posted by: John R, Eastleigh on 11:01am Thu 8 May 08
I share Mr Keyworth's fustration with EBC's Enforcers! My wife parked her distinctive purple coloured Rover 100 opposite our house at about 5.30pm on Thursday 24th April, where it remained while we had 7 days holiday in Market Harborough. We arrived back home at 6.30pm on Thursday 1st May.
When it was parked facing south, exposed to the sun, rain and all other elements, on that Thursday evening the obligatory Parking permit was on display on the windscreen adjacent to the other tax disc. (They are both forms of taxation, aren’t they?).
It would appear that the Permit remained fixed to the ‘screen for all of Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday until the adhesive suction gave up on the permit holder sometime on Wednesday 30th April. The permit and holder fell into the passenger side footwell of the car, landing face up and quite clearly visible. That’s when the fist “parking ticket” appeared.
Now we are quite proud that our neighbours took the time to point this out to the totalitarian little Stalinist who issued the parking ticket only for the uniformed cretin to look disdainfully into the footwell, shrug their shoulder and amble off in the direction of the Swan Centre.
The Lib-Dem’s personal anti-car tax surfaced again on Thursday 1st May with the 2nd parking ticket slapped on the screen, just to add insult to injury!
Now am I being a little too assumptive, or am I naïve, but wouldn’t any normal person do the following:
1. Recognise a distinctive small purple car with pink interior that had been parked in the same location, without moving, for 7 days
2. Realise that as it was facing due south that the disc had fallen off
3. Take a closer look into the inside of the car
4. Look even closer when it had been pointed out to the by a concerned neighbour
5. Then cancel the ticket and advise their colleagues of the problem
6. Check on the Council database that a permit had actually been issued for the vehicle
My wife phoned the Politburo to discuss the issue only to receive a summarily discourteous reply that she would have to write in to the Council stating her case.
Well I’ve taken this opportunity to have “a rant” in both the local and national Press as I feel the actions of the “enforcers” are going too far, that they have no idea of discretion and probably insignificant training.
I share Mr Keyworth's fustration with EBC's Enforcers! My wife parked her distinctive purple coloured Rover 100 opposite our house at about 5.30pm on Thursday 24th April, where it remained while we had 7 days holiday in Market Harborough. We arrived back home at 6.30pm on Thursday 1st May.
When it was parked facing south, exposed to the sun, rain and all other elements, on that Thursday evening the obligatory Parking permit was on display on the windscreen adjacent to the other tax disc. (They are both forms of taxation, aren’t they?).
It would appear that the Permit remained fixed to the ‘screen for all of Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday until the adhesive suction gave up on the permit holder sometime on Wednesday 30th April. The permit and holder fell into the passenger side footwell of the car, landing face up and quite clearly visible. That’s when the fist “parking ticket” appeared.
Now we are quite proud that our neighbours took the time to point this out to the totalitarian little Stalinist who issued the parking ticket only for the uniformed cretin to look disdainfully into the footwell, shrug their shoulder and amble off in the direction of the Swan Centre.
The Lib-Dem’s personal anti-car tax surfaced again on Thursday 1st May with the 2nd parking ticket slapped on the screen, just to add insult to injury!
Now am I being a little too assumptive, or am I naïve, but wouldn’t any normal person do the following:
1. Recognise a distinctive small purple car with pink interior that had been parked in the same location, without moving, for 7 days
2. Realise that as it was facing due south that the disc had fallen off
3. Take a closer look into the inside of the car
4. Look even closer when it had been pointed out to the by a concerned neighbour
5. Then cancel the ticket and advise their colleagues of the problem
6. Check on the Council database that a permit had actually been issued for the vehicle
My wife phoned the Politburo to discuss the issue only to receive a summarily discourteous reply that she would have to write in to the Council stating her case.
Well I’ve taken this opportunity to have “a rant” in both the local and national Press as I feel the actions of the “enforcers” are going too far, that they have no idea of discretion and probably insignificant training.
Posted by: Christoff on 11:06am Thu 8 May 08
[quote][bold]John R[/bold] wrote:
I share Mr Keyworth's fustration with EBC's Enforcers! My wife parked her distinctive purple coloured Rover 100 opposite our house at about 5.30pm on Thursday 24th April, where it remained while we had 7 days holiday in Market Harborough. We arrived back home at 6.30pm on Thursday 1st May. When it was parked facing south, exposed to the sun, rain and all other elements, on that Thursday evening the obligatory Parking permit was on display on the windscreen adjacent to the other tax disc. (They are both forms of taxation, aren’t they?). It would appear that the Permit remained fixed to the ‘screen for all of Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday until the adhesive suction gave up on the permit holder sometime on Wednesday 30th April. The permit and holder fell into the passenger side footwell of the car, landing face up and quite clearly visible. That’s when the fist “parking ticket” appeared. Now we are quite proud that our neighbours took the time to point this out to the totalitarian little Stalinist who issued the parking ticket only for the uniformed cretin to look disdainfully into the footwell, shrug their shoulder and amble off in the direction of the Swan Centre. The Lib-Dem’s personal anti-car tax surfaced again on Thursday 1st May with the 2nd parking ticket slapped on the screen, just to add insult to injury! Now am I being a little too assumptive, or am I naïve, but wouldn’t any normal person do the following: 1. Recognise a distinctive small purple car with pink interior that had been parked in the same location, without moving, for 7 days 2. Realise that as it was facing due south that the disc had fallen off 3. Take a closer look into the inside of the car 4. Look even closer when it had been pointed out to the by a concerned neighbour 5. Then cancel the ticket and advise their colleagues of the problem 6. Check on the Council database that a permit had actually been issued for the vehicle My wife phoned the Politburo to discuss the issue only to receive a summarily discourteous reply that she would have to write in to the Council stating her case. Well I’ve taken this opportunity to have “a rant” in both the local and national Press as I feel the actions of the “enforcers” are going too far, that they have no idea of discretion and probably insignificant training. [/quote] unfortunately your scenario doesn't surprise me one little bit. They seem to be nothing but nasty little job-worths.
I'm sure some of the posters on this site will still say you deserved to get a ticket
John R wrote:
I share Mr Keyworth's fustration with EBC's Enforcers! My wife parked her distinctive purple coloured Rover 100 opposite our house at about 5.30pm on Thursday 24th April, where it remained while we had 7 days holiday in Market Harborough. We arrived back home at 6.30pm on Thursday 1st May. When it was parked facing south, exposed to the sun, rain and all other elements, on that Thursday evening the obligatory Parking permit was on display on the windscreen adjacent to the other tax disc. (They are both forms of taxation, aren’t they?). It would appear that the Permit remained fixed to the ‘screen for all of Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday until the adhesive suction gave up on the permit holder sometime on Wednesday 30th April. The permit and holder fell into the passenger side footwell of the car, landing face up and quite clearly visible. That’s when the fist “parking ticket” appeared. Now we are quite proud that our neighbours took the time to point this out to the totalitarian little Stalinist who issued the parking ticket only for the uniformed cretin to look disdainfully into the footwell, shrug their shoulder and amble off in the direction of the Swan Centre. The Lib-Dem’s personal anti-car tax surfaced again on Thursday 1st May with the 2nd parking ticket slapped on the screen, just to add insult to injury! Now am I being a little too assumptive, or am I naïve, but wouldn’t any normal person do the following: 1. Recognise a distinctive small purple car with pink interior that had been parked in the same location, without moving, for 7 days 2. Realise that as it was facing due south that the disc had fallen off 3. Take a closer look into the inside of the car 4. Look even closer when it had been pointed out to the by a concerned neighbour 5. Then cancel the ticket and advise their colleagues of the problem 6. Check on the Council database that a permit had actually been issued for the vehicle My wife phoned the Politburo to discuss the issue only to receive a summarily discourteous reply that she would have to write in to the Council stating her case. Well I’ve taken this opportunity to have “a rant” in both the local and national Press as I feel the actions of the “enforcers” are going too far, that they have no idea of discretion and probably insignificant training.
unfortunately your scenario doesn't surprise me one little bit. They seem to be nothing but nasty little job-worths.
I'm sure some of the posters on this site will still say you deserved to get a ticket
Posted by: jim, C/Ford on 11:17am Thu 8 May 08
[quote][bold]John R[/bold] wrote:
I share Mr Keyworth\'s fustration with EBC\'s Enforcers! My wife parked her distinctive purple coloured Rover 100 opposite our house at about 5.30pm on Thursday 24th April, where it remained while we had 7 days holiday in Market Harborough. We arrived back home at 6.30pm on Thursday 1st May. When it was parked facing south, exposed to the sun, rain and all other elements, on that Thursday evening the obligatory Parking permit was on display on the windscreen adjacent to the other tax disc. (They are both forms of taxation, aren’t they?). It would appear that the Permit remained fixed to the ‘screen for all of Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday until the adhesive suction gave up on the permit holder sometime on Wednesday 30th April. The permit and holder fell into the passenger side footwell of the car, landing face up and quite clearly visible. That’s when the fist “parking ticket” appeared. Now we are quite proud that our neighbours took the time to point this out to the totalitarian little Stalinist who issued the parking ticket only for the uniformed cretin to look disdainfully into the footwell, shrug their shoulder and amble off in the direction of the Swan Centre. The Lib-Dem’s personal anti-car tax surfaced again on Thursday 1st May with the 2nd parking ticket slapped on the screen, just to add insult to injury! Now am I being a little too assumptive, or am I naïve, but wouldn’t any normal person do the following: 1. Recognise a distinctive small purple car with pink interior that had been parked in the same location, without moving, for 7 days 2. Realise that as it was facing due south that the disc had fallen off 3. Take a closer look into the inside of the car 4. Look even closer when it had been pointed out to the by a concerned neighbour 5. Then cancel the ticket and advise their colleagues of the problem 6. Check on the Council database that a permit had actually been issued for the vehicle My wife phoned the Politburo to discuss the issue only to receive a summarily discourteous reply that she would have to write in to the Council stating her case. Well I’ve taken this opportunity to have “a rant” in both the local and national Press as I feel the actions of the “enforcers” are going too far, that they have no idea of discretion and probably insignificant training. [/quote] If you write to the Council or appeal you might have a chance here - this happened to one of my friends who showed he had a valid permit and the fine was cleared.
But it does serve you right for having purple Metro. Deserve everything you get!!!!!! ;)
John R wrote:
I share Mr Keyworth\'s fustration with EBC\'s Enforcers! My wife parked her distinctive purple coloured Rover 100 opposite our house at about 5.30pm on Thursday 24th April, where it remained while we had 7 days holiday in Market Harborough. We arrived back home at 6.30pm on Thursday 1st May. When it was parked facing south, exposed to the sun, rain and all other elements, on that Thursday evening the obligatory Parking permit was on display on the windscreen adjacent to the other tax disc. (They are both forms of taxation, aren’t they?). It would appear that the Permit remained fixed to the ‘screen for all of Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday until the adhesive suction gave up on the permit holder sometime on Wednesday 30th April. The permit and holder fell into the passenger side footwell of the car, landing face up and quite clearly visible. That’s when the fist “parking ticket” appeared. Now we are quite proud that our neighbours took the time to point this out to the totalitarian little Stalinist who issued the parking ticket only for the uniformed cretin to look disdainfully into the footwell, shrug their shoulder and amble off in the direction of the Swan Centre. The Lib-Dem’s personal anti-car tax surfaced again on Thursday 1st May with the 2nd parking ticket slapped on the screen, just to add insult to injury! Now am I being a little too assumptive, or am I naïve, but wouldn’t any normal person do the following: 1. Recognise a distinctive small purple car with pink interior that had been parked in the same location, without moving, for 7 days 2. Realise that as it was facing due south that the disc had fallen off 3. Take a closer look into the inside of the car 4. Look even closer when it had been pointed out to the by a concerned neighbour 5. Then cancel the ticket and advise their colleagues of the problem 6. Check on the Council database that a permit had actually been issued for the vehicle My wife phoned the Politburo to discuss the issue only to receive a summarily discourteous reply that she would have to write in to the Council stating her case. Well I’ve taken this opportunity to have “a rant” in both the local and national Press as I feel the actions of the “enforcers” are going too far, that they have no idea of discretion and probably insignificant training.
If you write to the Council or appeal you might have a chance here - this happened to one of my friends who showed he had a valid permit and the fine was cleared.
But it does serve you right for having purple Metro. Deserve everything you get!!!!!! ;)
Posted by: Lawrence, Southampton on 11:52am Thu 8 May 08
[quote][bold]sue[/bold] wrote:
It would be nice if Southampton acted as well to stop people parking on pavements. However Southampton cares nothing for pedestrians.[/quote] nor does Southampton care about its cyclists. I understand that cyclists annoy some cars, but imagine them all using cars too, imagine an even more chaotic traffic at peak time!
sue wrote:
It would be nice if Southampton acted as well to stop people parking on pavements. However Southampton cares nothing for pedestrians.
nor does Southampton care about its cyclists. I understand that cyclists annoy some cars, but imagine them all using cars too, imagine an even more chaotic traffic at peak time!
Posted by: Adrian Smith, Just back from Bodycoats Road on my bike on 11:54am Thu 8 May 08
[quote][bold]Christoff[/bold] wrote:
I reckon he has a good chance of getting it waived. I have challenged on a similar basis and been successful. Ignorance of the law is no excuse but the signage is the main issue, if it is not clearly identified he will have a good chance. I hope he has taken good photo evidence of the signs covered by the trees. Hope he sticks it to 'em. The time the ticket was issued idicates how petty and desperate they are...weasels[/quote] Although I understand from where you are coming I have just travelled down the entire length of Bodycoats Road to see for myself.
At the Eastleigh end there is a 100 metre section which clearly states it is "traffic calmed". Those signs couldn't be obscured by trees. Then there are these little yellow signs - these are also clearly visible on each side of the road at regular intervals stating clearly no parking on the verges. Trees could not obscure these either.
This chap is just an IT engineer seeking attention. His ticket should not be waived under any circumstances. He only has himself to blame.
Christoff wrote:
I reckon he has a good chance of getting it waived. I have challenged on a similar basis and been successful. Ignorance of the law is no excuse but the signage is the main issue, if it is not clearly identified he will have a good chance. I hope he has taken good photo evidence of the signs covered by the trees. Hope he sticks it to 'em. The time the ticket was issued idicates how petty and desperate they are...weasels
Although I understand from where you are coming I have just travelled down the entire length of Bodycoats Road to see for myself.
At the Eastleigh end there is a 100 metre section which clearly states it is "traffic calmed". Those signs couldn't be obscured by trees. Then there are these little yellow signs - these are also clearly visible on each side of the road at regular intervals stating clearly no parking on the verges. Trees could not obscure these either.
This chap is just an IT engineer seeking attention. His ticket should not be waived under any circumstances. He only has himself to blame.
Posted by: Adrian Smith on 11:57am Thu 8 May 08
[quote][bold]Lawrence[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]sue[/bold] wrote: It would be nice if Southampton acted as well to stop people parking on pavements. However Southampton cares nothing for pedestrians.[/quote] nor does Southampton care about its cyclists. I understand that cyclists annoy some cars, but imagine them all using cars too, imagine an even more chaotic traffic at peak time![/quote] Report bad drivers to the better driving please website. The Echo have already censored the link three times.
Lawrence wrote:
sue wrote: It would be nice if Southampton acted as well to stop people parking on pavements. However Southampton cares nothing for pedestrians.
nor does Southampton care about its cyclists. I understand that cyclists annoy some cars, but imagine them all using cars too, imagine an even more chaotic traffic at peak time!
Report bad drivers to the better driving please website. The Echo have already censored the link three times.
Posted by: mick, Warsash on 12:18pm Thu 8 May 08
Serves him right, my wife is registered blind, its a constant problem. Often she has to walk out in the road
Serves him right, my wife is registered blind, its a constant problem. Often she has to walk out in the road
Posted by: Live nearby on 12:24pm Thu 8 May 08
[quote][bold]hulla[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Denzil[/bold] wrote: "An Eastleigh Council spokes-man said: "The bright yellow signs identifying the restrictions meet the standards set down by the Department For Transport." If Mr Keyworth is having trouble understanding these "bright yellow signs" he should seriously consider giving up driving or be made to retake his driving test. Silly attention seeker.[/quote] This paragraph in the story is a possible explanation. ""There are no road markings to draw a motorist's attention to the restrictions and the signs on the lamposts are very small and are hidden by trees.[/quote] The signs are actually on dedicated posts at regualr intervals on each side of the road. They simply cannot be missed - but they can be ignored at a price.
hulla wrote:
Denzil wrote: "An Eastleigh Council spokes-man said: "The bright yellow signs identifying the restrictions meet the standards set down by the Department For Transport." If Mr Keyworth is having trouble understanding these "bright yellow signs" he should seriously consider giving up driving or be made to retake his driving test. Silly attention seeker.
This paragraph in the story is a possible explanation. ""There are no road markings to draw a motorist's attention to the restrictions and the signs on the lamposts are very small and are hidden by trees.
The signs are actually on dedicated posts at regualr intervals on each side of the road. They simply cannot be missed - but they can be ignored at a price.
Posted by: Christoff on 12:31pm Thu 8 May 08
[quote][bold]Adrian Smith[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Christoff[/bold] wrote: I reckon he has a good chance of getting it waived. I have challenged on a similar basis and been successful. Ignorance of the law is no excuse but the signage is the main issue, if it is not clearly identified he will have a good chance. I hope he has taken good photo evidence of the signs covered by the trees. Hope he sticks it to 'em. The time the ticket was issued idicates how petty and desperate they are...weasels[/quote] Although I understand from where you are coming I have just travelled down the entire length of Bodycoats Road to see for myself. At the Eastleigh end there is a 100 metre section which clearly states it is "traffic calmed". Those signs couldn't be obscured by trees. Then there are these little yellow signs - these are also clearly visible on each side of the road at regular intervals stating clearly no parking on the verges. Trees could not obscure these either. This chap is just an IT engineer seeking attention. His ticket should not be waived under any circumstances. He only has himself to blame.[/quote] if that's the case then he has it coming. If there was no signage apart from those obscured by the trees then I would support him, if what you say is true then I don't.
Thanks for clearing that up though!
Adrian Smith wrote:
Christoff wrote: I reckon he has a good chance of getting it waived. I have challenged on a similar basis and been successful. Ignorance of the law is no excuse but the signage is the main issue, if it is not clearly identified he will have a good chance. I hope he has taken good photo evidence of the signs covered by the trees. Hope he sticks it to 'em. The time the ticket was issued idicates how petty and desperate they are...weasels
Although I understand from where you are coming I have just travelled down the entire length of Bodycoats Road to see for myself. At the Eastleigh end there is a 100 metre section which clearly states it is "traffic calmed". Those signs couldn't be obscured by trees. Then there are these little yellow signs - these are also clearly visible on each side of the road at regular intervals stating clearly no parking on the verges. Trees could not obscure these either. This chap is just an IT engineer seeking attention. His ticket should not be waived under any circumstances. He only has himself to blame.
if that's the case then he has it coming. If there was no signage apart from those obscured by the trees then I would support him, if what you say is true then I don't.
Thanks for clearing that up though!
Posted by: Grammar Police, Southampton on 12:32pm Thu 8 May 08
Parking on grass verges should be illegal everywhere. Ruins the grass, obstructs pedestrians and in particular Mobility Scooters and pushchairs.
However, Eastleigh's traffic wardens seem to be working around the clock. Apparently, the town centre wardens have increased from one to 15 a while back. My other half was illegally parked and received a ticket at 8.30pm on a Friday night. Deserved the ticket I agree, but could not believe wardens were on patrol at that time of day.
Hi Denzil.
Parking on grass verges should be illegal everywhere. Ruins the grass, obstructs pedestrians and in particular Mobility Scooters and pushchairs.
However, Eastleigh's traffic wardens seem to be working around the clock. Apparently, the town centre wardens have increased from one to 15 a while back. My other half was illegally parked and received a ticket at 8.30pm on a Friday night. Deserved the ticket I agree, but could not believe wardens were on patrol at that time of day.
Hi Denzil.
Posted by: Sparky Wilts, Here on 12:48pm Thu 8 May 08
Just one other point(see other post) WHERE DOES THIS GUY THINK THE DOGS WILL BE ABLE TO c*ap.
Just one other point(see other post) WHERE DOES THIS GUY THINK THE DOGS WILL BE ABLE TO c*ap.
Posted by: Anon, Southampton on 1:16pm Thu 8 May 08
I hope this guy gets his money back, the council make too much money out of parking charges and fines! £70 is A LOT of money and I don't see how they can justify it!
I hope this guy gets his money back, the council make too much money out of parking charges and fines! £70 is A LOT of money and I don't see how they can justify it!
Posted by: fred, southampton on 1:22pm Thu 8 May 08
Won't do it again though will he. Job done
Won't do it again though will he. Job done
Posted by: Mr Angry on 1:26pm Thu 8 May 08
Silly man!
Silly story!
Silly headline!
His neighbours are allowed to?!
A few hundred yards up the rosd it is OK?!
In Bodycoats, these are not exactly his neighbours!
Silly man!
Silly story!
Silly headline!
His neighbours are allowed to?!
A few hundred yards up the rosd it is OK?!
In Bodycoats, these are not exactly his neighbours!
Posted by: hmm on 1:38pm Thu 8 May 08
[quote][bold]John R[/bold] wrote:
I share Mr Keyworth's fustration with EBC's Enforcers! My wife parked
her distinctive purple coloured Rover 100 opposite our house at about
5.30pm on Thursday 24th April, where it remained while we had 7 days
holiday in Market Harborough. We arrived back home at 6.30pm on
Thursday 1st May.
When it was parked facing south, exposed to the sun, rain and all other
elements, on that Thursday evening the obligatory Parking permit was on
display on the windscreen adjacent to the other tax disc. (They are
both forms of taxation, aren’t they?).
It would appear that the Permit remained fixed to the ‘screen for all
of Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday until the adhesive
suction gave up on the permit holder sometime on Wednesday 30th April.
The permit and holder fell into the passenger side footwell of the car,
landing face up and quite clearly visible. That’s when the fist
“parking ticket” appeared.
Now we are quite proud that our neighbours took the time to point this
out to the totalitarian little Stalinist who issued the parking ticket
only for the uniformed cretin to look disdainfully into the footwell,
shrug their shoulder and amble off in the direction of the Swan Centre.
The Lib-Dem’s personal anti-car tax surfaced again on Thursday 1st May
with the 2nd parking ticket slapped on the screen, just to add insult
to injury!
Now am I being a little too assumptive, or am I naïve, but wouldn’t any
normal person do the following:
1. Recognise a distinctive small purple car with pink interior that had
been parked in the same location, without moving, for 7 days
2. Realise that as it was facing due south that the disc had fallen off
3. Take a closer look into the inside of the car
4. Look even closer when it had been pointed out to the by a concerned
neighbour
5. Then cancel the ticket and advise their colleagues of the problem
6. Check on the Council database that a permit had actually been issued
for the vehicle
My wife phoned the Politburo to discuss the issue only to receive a
summarily discourteous reply that she would have to write in to the
Council stating her case.
Well I’ve taken this opportunity to have “a rant” in both the local and
national Press as I feel the actions of the “enforcers” are going too
far, that they have no idea of discretion and probably insignificant
training.
[/quote] Must traffic wardens carry a compass now?
I assume you faced it southwards to comply with traffic regualtions, as you think everyone should know about cars facing southwards, why didnt you either close your vents or apply it by some better means?
John R wrote:
I share Mr Keyworth's fustration with EBC's Enforcers! My wife parked
her distinctive purple coloured Rover 100 opposite our house at about
5.30pm on Thursday 24th April, where it remained while we had 7 days
holiday in Market Harborough. We arrived back home at 6.30pm on
Thursday 1st May.
When it was parked facing south, exposed to the sun, rain and all other
elements, on that Thursday evening the obligatory Parking permit was on
display on the windscreen adjacent to the other tax disc. (They are
both forms of taxation, aren’t they?).
It would appear that the Permit remained fixed to the ‘screen for all
of Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday until the adhesive
suction gave up on the permit holder sometime on Wednesday 30th April.
The permit and holder fell into the passenger side footwell of the car,
landing face up and quite clearly visible. That’s when the fist
“parking ticket” appeared.
Now we are quite proud that our neighbours took the time to point this
out to the totalitarian little Stalinist who issued the parking ticket
only for the uniformed cretin to look disdainfully into the footwell,
shrug their shoulder and amble off in the direction of the Swan Centre.
The Lib-Dem’s personal anti-car tax surfaced again on Thursday 1st May
with the 2nd parking ticket slapped on the screen, just to add insult
to injury!
Now am I being a little too assumptive, or am I naïve, but wouldn’t any
normal person do the following:
1. Recognise a distinctive small purple car with pink interior that had
been parked in the same location, without moving, for 7 days
2. Realise that as it was facing due south that the disc had fallen off
3. Take a closer look into the inside of the car
4. Look even closer when it had been pointed out to the by a concerned
neighbour
5. Then cancel the ticket and advise their colleagues of the problem
6. Check on the Council database that a permit had actually been issued
for the vehicle
My wife phoned the Politburo to discuss the issue only to receive a
summarily discourteous reply that she would have to write in to the
Council stating her case.
Well I’ve taken this opportunity to have “a rant” in both the local and
national Press as I feel the actions of the “enforcers” are going too
far, that they have no idea of discretion and probably insignificant
training.
Must traffic wardens carry a compass now?
I assume you faced it southwards to comply with traffic regualtions, as you think everyone should know about cars facing southwards, why didnt you either close your vents or apply it by some better means?
Posted by: Come back to bite you reminder on 1:43pm Thu 8 May 08
[quote][bold]Anon[/bold] wrote:
I hope this guy gets his money back, the council make too much money out of parking charges and fines! £70 is A LOT of money and I don't see how they can justify it![/quote] One day when you are blind, pushing a pram or perhaps just in need of a pavement for peds you may just remember your pathetic post here.
Anon wrote:
I hope this guy gets his money back, the council make too much money out of parking charges and fines! £70 is A LOT of money and I don't see how they can justify it!
One day when you are blind, pushing a pram or perhaps just in need of a pavement for peds you may just remember your pathetic post here.
Posted by: Sue, Southampton on 1:48pm Thu 8 May 08
Southampton does nothing to make the pavements safe. There are always cars parkled on the pavement at Stag Gates in the pedestrian area and cycle path. They have never been ticketed. Police and traffic wardens are not interested. Illegal parking all the time in Portswood and Highfield is ignored.
We should form a "Claim the Pavements back for pedestrians " movement.
Southampton does nothing to make the pavements safe. There are always cars parkled on the pavement at Stag Gates in the pedestrian area and cycle path. They have never been ticketed. Police and traffic wardens are not interested. Illegal parking all the time in Portswood and Highfield is ignored.
We should form a "Claim the Pavements back for pedestrians " movement.
Posted by: Anon, Hilchrest Avenue, Chandlers Ford on 1:53pm Thu 8 May 08
I know this road quite well as it runs next to mine and if it suffers from as much traffic as mine then i can understand why he parks partly on the verge,i have to on my road as if two cars park on either side there isnt enough room between for a van to pass and seing as on Bodycoats road there is a bus route i dont blame him.
I know this road quite well as it runs next to mine and if it suffers from as much traffic as mine then i can understand why he parks partly on the verge,i have to on my road as if two cars park on either side there isnt enough room between for a van to pass and seing as on Bodycoats road there is a bus route i dont blame him.
Posted by: Anon, Hilchrest Avenue, Chandlers Ford on 1:53pm Thu 8 May 08
I know this road quite well as it runs next to mine and if it suffers from as much traffic as mine then i can understand why he parks partly on the verge,i have to on my road as if two cars park on either side there isnt enough room between for a van to pass and seeing as on Bodycoats road there is a bus route i dont blame him.
I know this road quite well as it runs next to mine and if it suffers from as much traffic as mine then i can understand why he parks partly on the verge,i have to on my road as if two cars park on either side there isnt enough room between for a van to pass and seeing as on Bodycoats road there is a bus route i dont blame him.
Posted by: Regular cyclist, London Road on 2:00pm Thu 8 May 08
[quote][bold]Sue[/bold] wrote:
Southampton does nothing to make the pavements safe. There are always cars parkled on the pavement at Stag Gates in the pedestrian area and cycle path. They have never been ticketed. Police and traffic wardens are not interested. Illegal parking all the time in Portswood and Highfield is ignored. We should form a "Claim the Pavements back for pedestrians " movement.[/quote] OK, where do we hold the first meeting?
Sue wrote:
Southampton does nothing to make the pavements safe. There are always cars parkled on the pavement at Stag Gates in the pedestrian area and cycle path. They have never been ticketed. Police and traffic wardens are not interested. Illegal parking all the time in Portswood and Highfield is ignored. We should form a "Claim the Pavements back for pedestrians " movement.
OK, where do we hold the first meeting?
Posted by: John Roche on 2:22pm Thu 8 May 08
[quote][bold]hmm[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]John R[/bold] wrote: I share Mr Keyworth\'s fustration with EBC\'s Enforcers! My wife parked her distinctive purple coloured Rover 100 opposite our house at about 5.30pm on Thursday 24th April, where it remained while we had 7 days holiday in Market Harborough. We arrived back home at 6.30pm on Thursday 1st May. When it was parked facing south, exposed to the sun, rain and all other elements, on that Thursday evening the obligatory Parking permit was on display on the windscreen adjacent to the other tax disc. (They are both forms of taxation, aren’t they?). It would appear that the Permit remained fixed to the ‘screen for all of Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday until the adhesive suction gave up on the permit holder sometime on Wednesday 30th April. The permit and holder fell into the passenger side footwell of the car, landing face up and quite clearly visible. That’s when the fist “parking ticket” appeared. Now we are quite proud that our neighbours took the time to point this out to the totalitarian little Stalinist who issued the parking ticket only for the uniformed cretin to look disdainfully into the footwell, shrug their shoulder and amble off in the direction of the Swan Centre. The Lib-Dem’s personal anti-car tax surfaced again on Thursday 1st May with the 2nd parking ticket slapped on the screen, just to add insult to injury! Now am I being a little too assumptive, or am I naïve, but wouldn’t any normal person do the following: 1. Recognise a distinctive small purple car with pink interior that had been parked in the same location, without moving, for 7 days 2. Realise that as it was facing due south that the disc had fallen off 3. Take a closer look into the inside of the car 4. Look even closer when it had been pointed out to the by a concerned neighbour 5. Then cancel the ticket and advise their colleagues of the problem 6. Check on the Council database that a permit had actually been issued for the vehicle My wife phoned the Politburo to discuss the issue only to receive a summarily discourteous reply that she would have to write in to the Council stating her case. Well I’ve taken this opportunity to have “a rant” in both the local and national Press as I feel the actions of the “enforcers” are going too far, that they have no idea of discretion and probably insignificant training. [/quote] Must traffic wardens carry a compass now? I assume you faced it southwards to comply with traffic regualtions, as you think everyone should know about cars facing southwards, why didnt you either close your vents or apply it by some better means?[/quote] Parking in Market Street is a Lottery at the best of times, especially with visitors to the Doctors Surgery parking where ever they can and Contractors working on the new cinema seemingly parking as they please. Neither the wife or I have a degree in Chemical Engineering so we know nothing about the lifespan or composition of adhesive substances and how they react to sunlight or heat! I don't think I can ever recall any vehicle being "booked" for facing the "wrong" way.
The point here is that the parking permit was still visible in the footwell after it had detached from the windscreen. Thanks to Christoff and all for the support (and it's a Rover 100 not a Metro according to the wife!!)
hmm wrote:
John R wrote: I share Mr Keyworth\'s fustration with EBC\'s Enforcers! My wife parked her distinctive purple coloured Rover 100 opposite our house at about 5.30pm on Thursday 24th April, where it remained while we had 7 days holiday in Market Harborough. We arrived back home at 6.30pm on Thursday 1st May. When it was parked facing south, exposed to the sun, rain and all other elements, on that Thursday evening the obligatory Parking permit was on display on the windscreen adjacent to the other tax disc. (They are both forms of taxation, aren’t they?). It would appear that the Permit remained fixed to the ‘screen for all of Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday until the adhesive suction gave up on the permit holder sometime on Wednesday 30th April. The permit and holder fell into the passenger side footwell of the car, landing face up and quite clearly visible. That’s when the fist “parking ticket” appeared. Now we are quite proud that our neighbours took the time to point this out to the totalitarian little Stalinist who issued the parking ticket only for the uniformed cretin to look disdainfully into the footwell, shrug their shoulder and amble off in the direction of the Swan Centre. The Lib-Dem’s personal anti-car tax surfaced again on Thursday 1st May with the 2nd parking ticket slapped on the screen, just to add insult to injury! Now am I being a little too assumptive, or am I naïve, but wouldn’t any normal person do the following: 1. Recognise a distinctive small purple car with pink interior that had been parked in the same location, without moving, for 7 days 2. Realise that as it was facing due south that the disc had fallen off 3. Take a closer look into the inside of the car 4. Look even closer when it had been pointed out to the by a concerned neighbour 5. Then cancel the ticket and advise their colleagues of the problem 6. Check on the Council database that a permit had actually been issued for the vehicle My wife phoned the Politburo to discuss the issue only to receive a summarily discourteous reply that she would have to write in to the Council stating her case. Well I’ve taken this opportunity to have “a rant” in both the local and national Press as I feel the actions of the “enforcers” are going too far, that they have no idea of discretion and probably insignificant training.
Must traffic wardens carry a compass now? I assume you faced it southwards to comply with traffic regualtions, as you think everyone should know about cars facing southwards, why didnt you either close your vents or apply it by some better means?
Parking in Market Street is a Lottery at the best of times, especially with visitors to the Doctors Surgery parking where ever they can and Contractors working on the new cinema seemingly parking as they please. Neither the wife or I have a degree in Chemical Engineering so we know nothing about the lifespan or composition of adhesive substances and how they react to sunlight or heat! I don't think I can ever recall any vehicle being "booked" for facing the "wrong" way.
The point here is that the parking permit was still visible in the footwell after it had detached from the windscreen. Thanks to Christoff and all for the support (and it's a Rover 100 not a Metro according to the wife!!)
Posted by: hulla, baloo on 2:59pm Thu 8 May 08
[quote][bold]Live nearby[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]hulla[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]Denzil[/bold] wrote: \"An Eastleigh Council spokes-man said: \"The bright yellow signs identifying the restrictions meet the standards set down by the Department For Transport.\" If Mr Keyworth is having trouble understanding these \"bright yellow signs\" he should seriously consider giving up driving or be made to retake his driving test. Silly attention seeker.[/quote] This paragraph in the story is a possible explanation. \"\"There are no road markings to draw a motorist\'s attention to the restrictions and the signs on the lamposts are very small and are hidden by trees.[/quote] The signs are actually on dedicated posts at regualr intervals on each side of the road. They simply cannot be missed - but they can be ignored at a price.[/quote] Not knowing the area, I was assuming the signs could not be seen, as per the drivers comment.
However,as per yours, and other comments, I stand to be corrcted.
Live nearby wrote:
hulla wrote: Denzil wrote: \"An Eastleigh Council spokes-man said: \"The bright yellow signs identifying the restrictions meet the standards set down by the Department For Transport.\" If Mr Keyworth is having trouble understanding these \"bright yellow signs\" he should seriously consider giving up driving or be made to retake his driving test. Silly attention seeker.
This paragraph in the story is a possible explanation. \"\"There are no road markings to draw a motorist\'s attention to the restrictions and the signs on the lamposts are very small and are hidden by trees.
The signs are actually on dedicated posts at regualr intervals on each side of the road. They simply cannot be missed - but they can be ignored at a price.
Not knowing the area, I was assuming the signs could not be seen, as per the drivers comment.
However,as per yours, and other comments, I stand to be corrcted.
Posted by: M, Winchester on 3:37pm Thu 8 May 08
[quote][bold]Adrian Smith[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Lawrence[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]sue[/bold] wrote: It would be nice if Southampton acted as well to stop people parking on pavements. However Southampton cares nothing for pedestrians.[/quote] nor does Southampton care about its cyclists. I understand that cyclists annoy some cars, but imagine them all using cars too, imagine an even more chaotic traffic at peak time![/quote] Report bad drivers to the better driving please website. The Echo have already censored the link three times.[/quote] I went to visit this web site the daily echo wishes to censor. (What is their problem?)
What a brilliant idea to reduce the pent up frustration suffered by responsible drivers, and expose the idiots.
I doubt that any data from this website will ever influence a legal situation; reporting these bad drivers has the same effect as posting on this forum - none at all except the venting of bile.
Nonetheless I will be straight on there next time I witness dangerous driving. :-)
Adrian Smith wrote:
Lawrence wrote:
sue wrote: It would be nice if Southampton acted as well to stop people parking on pavements. However Southampton cares nothing for pedestrians.
nor does Southampton care about its cyclists. I understand that cyclists annoy some cars, but imagine them all using cars too, imagine an even more chaotic traffic at peak time!
Report bad drivers to the better driving please website. The Echo have already censored the link three times.
I went to visit this web site the daily echo wishes to censor. (What is their problem?)
What a brilliant idea to reduce the pent up frustration suffered by responsible drivers, and expose the idiots.
I doubt that any data from this website will ever influence a legal situation; reporting these bad drivers has the same effect as posting on this forum - none at all except the venting of bile.
Nonetheless I will be straight on there next time I witness dangerous driving. :-)
Posted by: stevie on 5:29pm Thu 8 May 08
Serves him right, chewing up grass verges is ignorant and anti social end of story, he broke the law. He seems to know you cannot park on verges in some areas, deserves all he gets.
Serves him right, chewing up grass verges is ignorant and anti social end of story, he broke the law. He seems to know you cannot park on verges in some areas, deserves all he gets.
Posted by: George on 5:34pm Thu 8 May 08
[quote][bold]M[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Adrian Smith[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]Lawrence[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]sue[/bold] wrote: It would be nice if Southampton acted as well to stop people parking on pavements. However Southampton cares nothing for pedestrians.[/quote] nor does Southampton care about its cyclists. I understand that cyclists annoy some cars, but imagine them all using cars too, imagine an even more chaotic traffic at peak time![/quote] Report bad drivers to the better driving please website. The Echo have already censored the link three times.[/quote] I went to visit this web site the daily echo wishes to censor. (What is their problem?) What a brilliant idea to reduce the pent up frustration suffered by responsible drivers, and expose the idiots. I doubt that any data from this website will ever influence a legal situation; reporting these bad drivers has the same effect as posting on this forum - none at all except the venting of bile. Nonetheless I will be straight on there next time I witness dangerous driving. :-)[/quote] They don't allow links to other websites. It's a pretty common thing on sites like this.
M wrote:
Adrian Smith wrote: Lawrence wrote: sue wrote: It would be nice if Southampton acted as well to stop people parking on pavements. However Southampton cares nothing for pedestrians.
nor does Southampton care about its cyclists. I understand that cyclists annoy some cars, but imagine them all using cars too, imagine an even more chaotic traffic at peak time!
Report bad drivers to the better driving please website. The Echo have already censored the link three times.
I went to visit this web site the daily echo wishes to censor. (What is their problem?) What a brilliant idea to reduce the pent up frustration suffered by responsible drivers, and expose the idiots. I doubt that any data from this website will ever influence a legal situation; reporting these bad drivers has the same effect as posting on this forum - none at all except the venting of bile. Nonetheless I will be straight on there next time I witness dangerous driving. :-)
They don't allow links to other websites. It's a pretty common thing on sites like this.
Posted by: Mel Morris, Burlington, Ont on 9:57pm Thu 8 May 08
I had to chuckle at the amazement that your traffic enforcers working at 6.45 and 8pm - here the by-law enforcement officers work 24/7. We live in a quiet suburb, and throughout the whole city there is a 3 hour parking limit on all roads. They will come round (not every night of course, but on a rotation) and will sometimes resort to 'chalking' your tires to see if they have been moved when they come back a few hours later. If your tire or car overhangs the sidewalk just an inch or two they will consider it 'obstructing the sidewalk' and you'll get a 45$ fine - as my son has learned to his cost. Whilst the 3hr limit is identified on major roads into the city - there are no specific signs anywhere else, you are expected to learn the bylaws or look them up.
I had to chuckle at the amazement that your traffic enforcers working at 6.45 and 8pm - here the by-law enforcement officers work 24/7. We live in a quiet suburb, and throughout the whole city there is a 3 hour parking limit on all roads. They will come round (not every night of course, but on a rotation) and will sometimes resort to 'chalking' your tires to see if they have been moved when they come back a few hours later. If your tire or car overhangs the sidewalk just an inch or two they will consider it 'obstructing the sidewalk' and you'll get a 45$ fine - as my son has learned to his cost. Whilst the 3hr limit is identified on major roads into the city - there are no specific signs anywhere else, you are expected to learn the bylaws or look them up.
Posted by: Di Healey, Southampton on 11:29pm Thu 8 May 08
I see both sides of the coin - whilst is it is out of order for people to park on verges and pavements, lots of people do it and cause obstructions for wheelchairs and prams but at least he wasn't blocking the pavement or causing an obstruction, and his point is that further up the road you can get away with it. In this era of diversity and equality, I understand his argument totally.
I see both sides of the coin - whilst is it is out of order for people to park on verges and pavements, lots of people do it and cause obstructions for wheelchairs and prams but at least he wasn't blocking the pavement or causing an obstruction, and his point is that further up the road you can get away with it. In this era of diversity and equality, I understand his argument totally.
Posted by: david keyworth, bodycoats road on 8:43am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]Di Healey[/bold] wrote:
I see both sides of the coin - whilst is it is out of order for people to park on verges and pavements, lots of people do it and cause obstructions for wheelchairs and prams but at least he wasn't blocking the pavement or causing an obstruction, and his point is that further up the road you can get away with it. In this era of diversity and equality, I understand his argument totally.[/quote] Thank You for those semi-kind words. As it happens, I almost always park off the road. My point really is that "everywhere else" there is no restriction on putting two wheels just on the verge. This is a bus route, and it was one of those moments where you think "it might be better if I leave a bit more room for the half-hour I have to park there". I should have been more observant as I live there, but why would anyone else, who doesn't live there, not knowing that just the odd bit is restricted, in the absence of any road marking (similar to, let's say, a dotted white on-street parking bay) think that they might have to check lampposts for little signs about the verge? The signs can be 60 yards apart and don't have to be more than about 4.5 inches big. And if there are mature trees in between the lampposts...
People may not be generally aware that the Council has been bringing in restrictions on these odd little bits, [bold]when the "general rule" is that there is no rule[/bold] . Just remember, if you ever feel the need to put a wheel or two just off the road (most of us have done it sometime or another), you may need to run 30 yards to find a 4 inch sign!
By contrast, we all know we can't stop on the huge yellow "school" road markings. But the sign reminding you is about 1 foot square!
Di Healey wrote:
I see both sides of the coin - whilst is it is out of order for people to park on verges and pavements, lots of people do it and cause obstructions for wheelchairs and prams but at least he wasn't blocking the pavement or causing an obstruction, and his point is that further up the road you can get away with it. In this era of diversity and equality, I understand his argument totally.
Thank You for those semi-kind words. As it happens, I almost always park off the road. My point really is that "everywhere else" there is no restriction on putting two wheels just on the verge. This is a bus route, and it was one of those moments where you think "it might be better if I leave a bit more room for the half-hour I have to park there". I should have been more observant as I live there, but why would anyone else, who doesn't live there, not knowing that just the odd bit is restricted, in the absence of any road marking (similar to, let's say, a dotted white on-street parking bay) think that they might have to check lampposts for little signs about the verge? The signs can be 60 yards apart and don't have to be more than about 4.5 inches big. And if there are mature trees in between the lampposts...
People may not be generally aware that the Council has been bringing in restrictions on these odd little bits,
when the "general rule" is that there is no rule . Just remember, if you ever feel the need to put a wheel or two just off the road (most of us have done it sometime or another), you may need to run 30 yards to find a 4 inch sign!
By contrast, we all know we can't stop on the huge yellow "school" road markings. But the sign reminding you is about 1 foot square!
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
