Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Mumsnet classics

Relive the funniest, most unforgettable threads. For a daily dose of Mumsnet’s best bits, sign up for Mumsnet's daily newsletter.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Locked parking thread 4 - The End

999 replies

BlueEyesWhiteDragon · 02/08/2021 19:33

We hope!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
Springmisttyshaw · 03/08/2021 03:43

Op glad your having fun, but just be aware if the driver has any sense this could turn ugly for you if your not careful. Under UK law.

"Private land
It is a criminal offence to clamp, tow, block-in or immobilise a vehicle without lawful authority on private land under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Lawful authority to immobilise or move a vehicle is restricted to a number of organisation such as the police, DVLA and local authorities.

To commit this offence a person must intend to prevent the owner/driver from moving their vehicle.

You could be liable to an unlimited fine in the Crown Court or up to £5,000 in a Magistrates Court."

Plus any damage he now claims to his vehicle he now pursue you for damages.

All fun and games until it turns nasty.

melj1213 · 03/08/2021 04:23

It is a criminal offence to clamp, tow, block-in or immobilise a vehicle without lawful authority on private land under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012

To commit this offence a person must intend to prevent the owner/driver from moving their vehicle.

The OP has done none of those things, she has merely secured her property (as per her insurance). She is also not preventing the driver from moving his vehicle, as soon as he knocks on the door and asks her to open the gate he is free to move his vehicle. The fact that the OPs DB could not find the keys to the gate while the OP was away at a time she had already explicitly specified to the CF she would not be available is unfortunate but nit illegal.

As for damages, the OP has CCTV and it would be on the CF to prove any damage occurred during its time at the OPs property.

Springmisttyshaw · 03/08/2021 04:30

@melj1213

It is a criminal offence to clamp, tow, block-in or immobilise a vehicle without lawful authority on private land under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012

To commit this offence a person must intend to prevent the owner/driver from moving their vehicle.

The OP has done none of those things, she has merely secured her property (as per her insurance). She is also not preventing the driver from moving his vehicle, as soon as he knocks on the door and asks her to open the gate he is free to move his vehicle. The fact that the OPs DB could not find the keys to the gate while the OP was away at a time she had already explicitly specified to the CF she would not be available is unfortunate but nit illegal.

As for damages, the OP has CCTV and it would be on the CF to prove any damage occurred during its time at the OPs property.

Actually yes she has prevented him removing his vehicle by locking it and and already prevented him leaving on numerous occasions.

FYi these are the excuses I hear often from defendants, it would not stand up in law. Also just because the defendant had CCTV the owness is not on the driver to prove any thing, I suggest you learn how these things work before quoting me. Hmm

FollowYourOwnNorthStar · 03/08/2021 04:52

@Springmisttyshaw it’s onus, not owness you have used the incorrect homonym (although the two words are not commonly recognised as homonyms, like right and write are, for example).

And I hear similar instructions from clients/defendants and the OP’s actions would be defendable. She secured her property, she proactively reached out to try and find the owner via social media, she spoke to Police and FC about options, she engaged with a representative of the owner (DS) and later the owner try and negotiate a time for collection, always ending with offering an available time.

The car owner on the other hand, has abandoned his car despite a warning, not knocked on the door of the home, not put anything on the windshield or mailbox or at the front door, and not made contact for days. When he has, he insisted on one time and would negotiate to an alternative time. He then appeared at the un-agreed time. He hasn’t appeared again, or made contact again.

You’re post thinking the OP doesn’t have a defence is incorrect.

Either way, this is not at that stage yet, and the OP should (as she is) keep the Police informed, and not listen to people trying to scare her when giving legal advice on the internet.

FollowYourOwnNorthStar · 03/08/2021 04:53

*your

melj1213 · 03/08/2021 05:02

Actually yes she has prevented him removing his vehicle by locking it and and already prevented him leaving on numerous occasions.

She has not prevented him from removing his vehicle.

She has kept her access gate locked as per her property insurance. She cannot leave her property unsecured, but he has still had access to the vehicle and the vehicle itself has not been clamped, towed, immobilised or blocked in.

At any point in the last three days he could have knocked on the door and asked her to unlock the gate to allow him to leave and she would have opened the gate to let him out and then immediately locked it again to secure her property

The only time the CF has been actively prevented from leaving was when he showed up and spoke to the OPs brother and even that is pushing it as he was made aware that the OP was not available at that specific time (as she had prior commitments elsewhere) to open the gate but she also informed him of the time she would be there. The fact he chose to ignore that information and turn up when he knew the OP was not going to be there with the keys is not the OPS fault.

The CF was explicitly told on Saturday that the OP was securing her property and was advised to leave but chose to stay (as per his note) in the full and total knowledge that the gate would be closed and he would have to request the OP opened it for him to leave.

Also just because the defendant had CCTV the owness is not on the driver to prove any thing, I suggest you learn how these things work before quoting me.

The OP has CCTV which would prove that she had not damaged the vehicle whilst on her property - you can't damage what you haven't touched - and therefore if the owner claimed damage then the onus would be on them to provide evidence to support their claim.

Sitchervice · 03/08/2021 05:13

#wouldn't want @Springmisttyshaw as my lawyer 🤣😂

ThumbWitchesAbroad · 03/08/2021 05:41

Lordy, I'm staggered that this utter cockwomble STILL hasn't been to collect his car! Maybe he has too many other vehicles at his disposal, so can't be bothered?

What a DICK though.

How long does it have to stay on your property before you get to claim it as abandoned?

brokenbiscuitsx · 03/08/2021 06:09

Wow the law really does protect entitled dickheads.

It is a criminal offence to clamp, tow, block-in or immobilise a vehicle without lawful authority on private land under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012

What about the freedoms of the person inconvenienced but oh no, let’s make sure the perpetrator has protected freedoms. What a joke!

Lovemypatchworkquilt · 03/08/2021 06:31

Car parked in front of farm access

www.facebook.com/SpottedInYorkshire/videos/2958563921131436/

BlueEyesWhiteDragon · 03/08/2021 06:39

it is a criminal offence to clamp, tow, block-in or immobilise a vehicle without lawful authority on private land under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012

I can well believe this and honestly it's the type of stuff that gives me the rage. Where is the protection for my land, my stuff? I'm cross again now.

All the jackass had to do was any one of the following.
A) move like he said he would do originally
B) knock on the door on Sat
C) leave a note on his car with a number if he was unable to work out how to access my front door
D) collect the car on Sunday
E) not turn up when I specifically said I'd be out.
F) collect the car when I said I'd be in.

OP posts:
Impier · 03/08/2021 06:41

@Springmisttyshaw

Op glad your having fun, but just be aware if the driver has any sense this could turn ugly for you if your not careful. Under UK law.

"Private land
It is a criminal offence to clamp, tow, block-in or immobilise a vehicle without lawful authority on private land under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Lawful authority to immobilise or move a vehicle is restricted to a number of organisation such as the police, DVLA and local authorities.

To commit this offence a person must intend to prevent the owner/driver from moving their vehicle.

You could be liable to an unlimited fine in the Crown Court or up to £5,000 in a Magistrates Court."

Plus any damage he now claims to his vehicle he now pursue you for damages.

All fun and games until it turns nasty.

How does 54(3) of the Act come into play here? Doesn't that give the OP lawful authority, especially as she said the gates would be locked in five minutes?
KupoNutCoffee · 03/08/2021 06:41

Well if we're going to start quoting acts can we at least quote the full bits?

Section 3 a little way down:

(3)But, where the restriction of the movement of the vehicle is by means of a fixed barrier and the barrier was present (whether or not lowered into place or otherwise restricting movement) when the vehicle was parked, any express or implied consent (whether or not legally binding) of the driver of the vehicle to the restriction is, for the purposes of subsection (1), lawful authority for the restriction.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/part/3/chapter/2/enacted

I am of course no lawyer or solicitor so can't even tell if this act applies in the context at all, as another site mainly references this in the context of actual car parks not individuals driveways.

Spudlet · 03/08/2021 06:44

Yes, but the op doesn’t intend to prevent the driver from moving the vehicle. She isn’t going to demand money or anything like that. All he has to do is make contact and turn up at the arranged time, the gate will be opened and off he’ll pop. He just isn’t doing that, for some bizarre reason. What a weirdo!

BlueEyesWhiteDragon · 03/08/2021 06:49

Or even better

G) NOT park there!

Anyway...

Nowt has happened. No visitors. No contact. Nowt.

DB did not sleep outside. He overestimated his ability to sleep on a hard wet floor projected from the elements only by a tarp and conceded defeat quite early on. He's off home now as well and has promised to remain a fighter of bad parking north of the border as valiantly as he did here. Hes a prat Grin

OP posts:
BlueEyesWhiteDragon · 03/08/2021 06:50

Projected should be protected obviously. See crossness renders me unable to check for errors.

OP posts:
Billybagpuss · 03/08/2021 06:51

@KupoNutCoffee

Well if we're going to start quoting acts can we at least quote the full bits?

Section 3 a little way down:

(3)But, where the restriction of the movement of the vehicle is by means of a fixed barrier and the barrier was present (whether or not lowered into place or otherwise restricting movement) when the vehicle was parked, any express or implied consent (whether or not legally binding) of the driver of the vehicle to the restriction is, for the purposes of subsection (1), lawful authority for the restriction.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/part/3/chapter/2/enacted

I am of course no lawyer or solicitor so can't even tell if this act applies in the context at all, as another site mainly references this in the context of actual car parks not individuals driveways.

Does that translate as if there’s an obvious barrier there you’re a stupid arse to park there and still expect the barrier to be open when you get back?
BruceAndNosh · 03/08/2021 06:53

Hopefully you slept well OP, and weren't woken by CF demanding his car at 1130 pm

newnortherner111 · 03/08/2021 07:01

After all this has happened, I do think that a possibly sympathetic MP should be contacted to campaign for a change in the law.

I think now you should contact the council and deem it an abandoned vehicle.

LakieLady · 03/08/2021 07:12

It is a criminal offence to clamp, tow, block-in or immobilise a vehicle without lawful authority on private land under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012

I'd love to see that in court (well, not really, because it would be hugely stressful for OP) just to see hundreds of pages of MN wafflings, complete with cock-and-ball trees, carvery lunches, and YP recipes, produced in court as evidence that OP took no end of reasonable steps for CF to collect his dickmobile without jeopardising the security of her property and animals.

GnomeDePlume · 03/08/2021 07:14

Perhaps an update to the community Facebook:

'The vehicle has now been here for several days, now looking at getting it towed as obviously dumped'

All you have had is a random, possibly chancer, turn up at your door (CCTV wasnt clear enough for identification). Could have been anyone.

SunshineCake · 03/08/2021 07:15

Someone's started a thread about a tank parked on their drive insinuating this is all made up Shock.

LakieLady · 03/08/2021 07:15

@olympicsrock

I have fallen out with DH who said that the CF should not have to apologise to OP.... almost left the bastardAngry
It's clearly unreasonable behaviour and you should start divorce proceedings immediately.

He doesn't drive a Ranger, does he? Grin

Billybagpuss · 03/08/2021 07:17

@LakieLady

It is a criminal offence to clamp, tow, block-in or immobilise a vehicle without lawful authority on private land under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012

I'd love to see that in court (well, not really, because it would be hugely stressful for OP) just to see hundreds of pages of MN wafflings, complete with cock-and-ball trees, carvery lunches, and YP recipes, produced in court as evidence that OP took no end of reasonable steps for CF to collect his dickmobile without jeopardising the security of her property and animals.

But op would have released him had he knocked on the door and asked. She also informed him the gates would be locked in 5 minutes yet he chose to ignore. She also made reasonable attempt to trace him and get in contact.

How did he get your number op was that from the sister, was she genuine?

DobbyTheHouseElk · 03/08/2021 07:20

I think they are communicating via messenger.

So Tuesday...what joys will CF bring today? Will he actually turn up and apologise and drive away or will he continue to be a prick.