What is the legal situation with obeying road signs on private land, which the public have access to?
For example, I frequently ignore no entry signs in car parks (when the situation safely permits), but I notice that not a lot of other people do.
Do they have the same legal standing as signs on the roads? If a copper saw you doing it, could they, in theory, give you a ticket?
|
|
they have no legality. Unless its MOD land.
|
|
I thought the Road Traffic Act applies to land which the public has access to, the drink drive bit does. What would be your insurance companies view of a bump in those circumstances be SS?
Last edited by: Old Navy on Wed 13 Apr 11 at 10:47
|
Unenforceable as far as the criminal law is concerned but ignoring such signs could well go against you in the event of a claim following an accident.
Have you ever wondered why most people obey these signs?
|
>> Unenforceable as far as the criminal law is concerned but ignoring such signs could well
>> go against you in the event of a claim following an accident.
>>
>> Have you ever wondered why most people obey these signs?
Baaaaaa!
|
As has been said, the Roads Traffic Acts - and all others - apply to any land to which the public has access.
Any proper road signs, by which I mean ones erected by the local authority/Highways Agency, have the same legal standing as if they were erected anywhere else.
An example might be on a motorway service area - very hard to judge where the publicly owned bit stops, and the privately owned bit starts.
|
>> Any proper road signs, by which I mean ones erected by the local authority/Highways Agency,
>> have the same legal standing as if they were erected anywhere else.
Interesting. So, for example, if the local authority had erected the signs in a Sainsbury's car park, they would be enforceable, but if Sainsbury's had erected them themselves, they wouldn't. Is that correct?
I have the same situation in a town centre multi-story. I'm not sure if it is council owned or not.
|
The local council and or the highways agency dont erect signs on private land.
Its the land that counts not who puts them there.
|
...The local council and or the highways agency dont erect signs on private land...
They have statutory powers to fix signs to the sides of buildings.
Often these will be simple name boards: 'Acacia Avenue'.
Less common are road signs to indicate road number, distance to a place, etc.
I can't think of a 'No Entry' sign stuck to someone's wall, but there will be one - or more likely two - somewhere.
|
Years ago I would occasionally drive onto a nearby motorway via a motorway service area where the access road was clearly signed 'No Entry'. I spoke to the local police beforehand and they confirmed that I was not committing an offence, and I was never approached by the service area staff.
I wouldn't be quite so cheeky nowadays though.
|
...Years ago I would occasionally drive onto a nearby motorway via a motorway service area where the access road was clearly signed 'No Entry'...
Used to do something similar at the Strensham service area on the M5 in Worcestershire.
The No Entry sign had been erected by the service area operator and had no legal force.
What did have force were the metal gates which were occasionally padlocked shut.
Last edited by: Iffy on Wed 13 Apr 11 at 11:14
|
|
The local supermarket has a couple of "No Entry" signs at the first two lanes of its car park - mainly to prevent right-turners waiting to enter the car park and creating a tailback out onto the main road I suspect. By and large they're adhered to, except by those drivers who also ignore the rules on seatbelts, tax discs etc.
Last edited by: Dave_TDCi {P} on Wed 13 Apr 11 at 11:22
|
>> By and large they're
>> adhered to, except by those drivers who also ignore the rules on seatbelts, tax discs
>> etc.
I ignore them if I consider it appropriate to do so, and yet I wear a seatbelt and have an up to date tax disc...weird
I suppose they are the same ones that stay out of bus lanes when they aren't in operation...just because everybody else does
I'm not complaining, of course, often makes life a little bit easier for me.
|
>> I ignore them if I consider it appropriate to do so
Which sets the same example to my kids as the pedestrians who can't wait for the green man at pelican crossings...
|
>> >> I ignore them if I consider it appropriate to do so
>>
>> Which sets the same example to my kids as the pedestrians who can't wait for
>> the green man at pelican crossings...
You want me to set a good example to other drivers?
BTW you want to make sure that your kids are actually looking at the whole situation and making an intelligent decision, rather than just looking for a green light.
|
|
Not that I would ignore them but I understand that double yellow lines in supermarkets hospitals etc are not enforceable in that they will probably not have been properly authorised by the relevant Local Authority but will have been put down by the site owners. That said I think that places which the public are invited to enter (supermarket car parks etc) are regarded as Public Places by the law, in some circumstances. It's confusing!
|
>>
>> That said I think that places which the public are invited to enter (supermarket car
>> parks etc) are regarded as Public Places by the law, in some circumstances. It's confusing!
>>
They are regarded as public places in the respect that anyone using a motor vehicle in them must have the same documentation as they would on the highway (licence, insurance etc) and the vehicle should be in a roadworthy condition, but the landowners own roadsigns are not legally enforceable.
Mind you, if the landowner put down double yellows and you found yourself clamped for ignoring them you'd have a problem.
Last edited by: Robin Regal on Wed 13 Apr 11 at 12:09
|
>> >> the landowners own roadsigns are not legally enforceable
Absolutely. Consider the wide range of road signs, and what could result!
|
Best to look on such signs as a request by the owner of the land .
If you put such a sign on your own land you would rightly be annoyed if your visitors chose to ignore it.
|
>> Mind you, if the landowner put down double yellows and you found yourself clamped for
>> ignoring them you'd have a problem.
>>
Erect your own sign then.. Angle grinder in use, keep clear.
|
>> double yellow lines in supermarkets
>>
>>
That's a good idea. Stop trolley congestion round the wine section.
|
Section 36 Road Traffic Act 1988 outlines the offence of failing to conform to a traffic sign lawfully placed ON A ROAD.
Private land in certian circumstances is NOT A ROAD as far as Road Traffic Act is concerned but may be included under that gambit because it is a PUBLIC PLACE and certain sections now include road OR public place. i.e. Insurance. careless driving, fail to stop etc.
The majority of signs have to be displayed under a Traffic Regulation Order made by the LA (local roads). I am not aware of LA bending to needs of a Supermarket etc to provide such an Order in relation to traffic Management matters on what is basically private land.
But as stated there may be a need to carrry out traffic management on site and whilst the sign may not be lawful if it conforms to that on the open road then disobeyance leading to an incident will count as fault at civil law.
dvd
No2av
|
|
The local Toby Carvery has a no right turn sign (written in text) exiting the car park, I've been ignoring it for the last 10 years, sounds like I'm safe to continue doing so.
|
>> a no right turn sign (written in text) exiting the car park
Possibly a condition of their planning permission? Or, as in my case above, an attempt at small-scale traffic management?
What would happen if another road user pulled out from a private driveway to the right of the Carvery, under the assumption that emerging traffic will all turn left, and was promptly run into by you? Would you in the wrong for ignoring the restriction?
|
>> >> a no right turn sign (written in text) exiting the car park
>>
>> Possibly a condition of their planning permission? Or, as in my case above, an attempt
>> at small-scale traffic management?
>>
The exit is close to the bottom of a NSL hill, pretty much at the point where the speed limit changes to 40. My guess is that they reckon that someone turning right may misjudge the speed of approaching vehicles that have come down the NSL hill and have a coming together. Visibilty is good though, it's not like approaching traffic is obscured.
>> What would happen if another road user pulled out from a private driveway to the
>> right of the Carvery, under the assumption that emerging traffic will all turn left, and
>> was promptly run into by you? Would you in the wrong for ignoring the restriction?
>>
A good question! I reckon:-
1 - the sign has no legal standing, it's not a proper no right turn as per the highway code.
2 - the other road user shouldn't be assuming anything about the actions of drivers leaving the car park.
3 - there aren't any driveways to the right anyway ;-)
This is the view up the hill when leaving the car park in question:-
maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=walkford&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF8&hl=en&hq=&hnear=Walkford,+Christchurch,+Dorset,+United+Kingdom&ll=50.746436,-1.7357&spn=0.001561,0.004823&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=50.746341,-1.735871&panoid=k5RwIStiShE-G59hTCO_Jw&cbp=12,80.73,,0,11.21
|
>> This is the view up the hill when leaving the car park
The only reason I can think of for the car park's restriction there would be to force traffic to turn left to join the road where approaching traffic will be naturally slowing down in anticipation of hazards, rather than turning right into the flow of traffic that will be naturally speeding up and where the drivers will be mentally changing into "fast road" mode.
And PP I'm sorry, that came out wrong. I wasn't suggesting you in particular ignore the No Entries (-ys?), rather that it's a common practice in general :)
|
>> double yellow lines in supermarkets hospitals etc are not enforceable in that they will probably not have been
>> properly authorised by the relevant Local Authority
Doesn't mean everyone should go around ignoring them though, does it? I'm sure the supermarkets/hospitals etc don't paint them for fun, rather to fulfil their obligations to H&S and in the interests of general traffic flow. Beats me why some drivers choose to act against the spirit of the regulations if not the letter of them.
|
|
No, of course they should not be ignored. As I clearly said in my original post "Not that I would ignore them". What I was querying was their legality!
|
|
Our local hospital has double yellows, enforced by traffic wardens, as is the surrounding area. Mainly for emergency access to A&E but also as there is a bus route through the grounds.
|
Beats me why some drivers choose to act against the spirit of the regulations if not the letter of them.
>>
My local hospital has a car park that is far too small for the number of people that need to use it, so it is constantly rammed full of cars.
The access road, which is a bit like a ring road, is hospital private property, but has yellow lines on it. The car park itself used to just have the Pay and Display machines, so you could ignore it (most didn't). Nowadays the car park only has clamping signs for non compliance of Pay and Display, although i've never seen anything clamped, but as I use it infequently that's not a thorough observation.
Most people drive in to the main car park and endlessly tour around or park up and wait for someone else to leave..then pay an extortionate rate to park via pay and display.
I and very few others park on the ring road..for free. No brainer as far as i'm concerned. The ring road, even with one sided parking can still have two lanes of traffic, albeit, obviously, more narrow. It's not a road the ambulances use..so not a problem for large vehicles or more importantly, a danger for the emergency vehicles.
Q: WHY ARE THERE YELLOW LINES THERE?...
A: Some muppet hasn't thought it through properly.
If there's space to park, why not let people park?...or is it yet another moron that wants us all on buses.
Why isn't there a multi story car park?
|
>> Q: WHY ARE THERE YELLOW LINES THERE?...
>>
>> A: Some muppet hasn't thought it through properly.
>>
>> If there's space to park, why not let people park?...or is it yet another moron
>> that wants us all on buses.
>>
>> Why isn't there a multi story car park?
Because the public service, excluding of course the police, is populated by muppets isn't it?
Alternatively:-
A. Because the road is used by lorries delivering supplies the hospital needs to function and because it's a key access route for fire etc and patient evacuation in an emergency. In either case risk assessment has flagged parked cars have as hindering these uses. The obvious control is to prohibit parking.
And multi storeys cost lots, need a certain amount of manoeuvre space to be viable ans raise 'nimby' objections from surroundin residences.
|
>> Alternatively:-
>>
>> A. Because the road is used by lorries delivering supplies the hospital needs to function
>> and because it's a key access route for fire etc and patient evacuation in an
>> emergency. In either case risk assessment has flagged parked cars have as hindering these uses.
>> The obvious control is to prohibit parking.
>>
>> And multi storeys cost lots, need a certain amount of manoeuvre space to be viable
>> ans raise 'nimby' objections from surroundin residences.
>
Barnet General Hospital.
The ring road does not need to have lorries in it. The ambulances use the public road at one end of it that has double yellows, as do the buses (Wellhouse Lane). There's an exit off the public road on to the private road, both at the front of the hospital where the car park is...and at the back of the hospital where all the machinery/bins and other such things are, so lorries use the rear entrance via the public road.
You wouldn't have a muster area in a road where cars drive, you'd use one end of the car park..plus..the ring road is at the other end of the car park to the entrance doors of the hospital, so not a natural choice.
Fire would obviously want the quickest and easiest route. When cars park on the ring road, there is still enough room for two way traffic, so no different to most city roads.
I see no obvious reason to control parking on the ring road.
The bit about the multi storey car park was intended to convey the thought process of actually providing the appropriate service to the poor taxpayer who uses this..and pays for it..handsomely... as well as those poor sods less well off than the rest of us, who have no choice but to constantly visit a hospital and can never park.
|
>> >> Unenforceable as far as the criminal law is concerned but ignoring such signs could
>> well
>> >> go against you in the event of a claim following an accident.
>> >>
>> >> Have you ever wondered why most people obey these signs?
>>
>> Baaaaaa!
>>
That's a rarity...............................a lone sheep.
|
Hello,
I was trying to park my campervan in a small customer parking area in front of the local Audi showroom. Apparently, my vehicle hit their sign causing damage... I was totally unaware as I thought it was just my wheels hitting the curb. However, a member of staff said it was my fault. I saw the damage and was amazed .... I cannot say that this was not done previously as the sign is in a VERY procariuos position, not much more than a metre from the curb. There was no damage to my vehicle.
They want my insurance details to claim £540 repairs... am I legally bound to give them as it is a private road? And would I be liable to pay?
Last edited by: DelorasPB on Sat 24 Sep 11 at 09:46
|
Your moving vehicle hit their stationary sign on their land and you ask are you liable? Of course you are.
You do not have to provide your insurance details to a third party unless there was an injury but you do need to provide your name and address and registration number. You must advise your insurers and forward any correspondence from the dealers to your insurers unless of course you want to pay them yourself, in which case advise your insurance company accordingly.
|
Section 154 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 stipulates that insurance details have to be provided for any third party claim - injury or non injury. This was an amendment to the legislation.
www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/154
|
You are of course correct Fullchat. I'm still in the world of motor insurance as it used to be when I worked for a motor insurer many years back.
|
Keep up! :-)
I had to hunt it down. Knew it was there somewhere.
Last edited by: Fullchat on Sun 25 Sep 11 at 11:07
|
...I had to hunt it down. Knew it was there somewhere...
I understand the third party can obtain the name of the insurance company, possibly from the Motor Insurers' Database.
The third party can then claim directly from the insurer.
There have been cases where the insured doesn't know a claim has been made until they come to renew.
I would be annoyed if the insurance company paid a claim against my policy without telling me, but I believe they can do it.
|
|
I would think so, if you did do the damage. They would have to prove it, if they have your reg number they could apply to the dvla to get your details and take you to court. Hopefully a legal type will be on soon to give you some more info.
|
Deloras, it's very easily done on a vehicle with a lot of blind spots, if there really is not a mark on your van I would question whether you really did the damage but if their member of staff saw it you will never be able to prove it was not you.
Agree with the others on this though, if you did it it doesn't matter where it was you are liable but I would question the amount & insist on getting other quotes.
|
|
How much overhang on said campervan? Sounds quite feasible that the end of the vehicle hit the sign if the wheels, fore or aft, hit the curb. Even if they didn't.....
|
Road signs on private land - Zero
