Just interested ng

I

ian08040

Vital Squad Member
One of my daughters was pushing her pram with toddler in the other day,came across a car parked on pavement,unable to get through easily,thought she would try,Guy came racing out,said you scratch my car you can pay damage,so she done no more than rang police,with this guy ranted and moved it,Road was pretty busy so she had no intentions of risking hers or toddlers life..
Just wondering anybody know what the situation would have been if my daughter had scratched the car,sorry it’s boring and not Gills related.
 
Had a look on the internet, lots of talk about it, but I can find no definitive answer to "accidental" damage. Intentional, although feeling morally correct, you can get nicked. Almost impossible to define accidental;)as against intentional. Needs a legal mind.
 
Its a difficult one. So many of the roads were never designed to have cars parked both sides and if they were then it could restrict access to emergency vehicles.

Problem is parking up on the pavement restricts access for people pushing wheelchairs or prams.

Its not illegal to park on the pavement outside London (it is in London) but I guess whats required is common sense e.g. try and leave enough room for people to get by.

Problem is too many cars and the aggressive attitude of people like the person in your example.

If only people could be more considerate without the aggression.
 
There will be far better qualified people than me to clear this up but for me it comes down to what a reasonable person would do. If the car is blocking the pavement but it’s easy for her to get past by going into the road then she could be deemed negligent and therefore liable to pay any damages. If she couldn’t get past any other way and it was unreasonable for her to stop her journey then I doubt she would be found negligent. The reasonableness of the car owner’s actions would likely be taken into account also.
If she has contents insurance it is likely this will include personal liability which takes the hassle out of it as it would be the insurance company’s lawyers that deal with any claim.
 
Some places have local bylaws making it an offence to park on pavements. There was a proposal by the Government a few weeks ago to make it illegal generally.

Parking on both sides of the road making it passable by single line traffic only is another issue. Such parking that restricts emergency vehicles should be avoided because I was informed that if these vehicles damage your own car you are not covered by your insurance or theirs.
 
Except in London it isn't an offense to park on the pavement, but blocking the pavement is. In order for anything to happen then the blockage needs to be assessed by a police officer or a PCSO. Punishment if not a warning could be a fixed rate fine or in worse cases the car impounded. I assume in the later case this is probably the worse case if the car is left an extended period of time.
 
Basically Ian, if you cause damage to someone else's property a Court will probably make you pay for it. There can always be mitigating factors when arguing legal liability but this is unlikely to avoid a finding of primary liability on the part of the person causing the damage; even when a car is illegally parked. In those circumstances the best you can hope for is a finding of contributory negligence on the part of the illegal parked driver (and hopefully a parking fine!).

As Nibbles says, if she has contents insurance this provides public liability insurance as standard cover and her insurance company would deal with the claim on her behalf. Having worked in liability claims for over 30 years i am sure her insurance company would have just paid for the repairs without a second thought.

It might seem unfair that some twat can just park wherever he likes to the detriment of pedestrians but even so it doesn't mean that the car can be damaged by pedestrians, even accidentally.

Hope that helps
 
Now you've got me on selfish drivers. W#nkers who leave their engines running for ages with no intention of moving. Meanwhile I'm having to breathe their pollution plus the morons are wasting their own money burning petrol.

Like some dog owners, their little precious car/dog is more lmportant than humans

Re the op, I'd have been tempted to key the bloody thing.
 
Ask your insurance company ian. They'll probably know a little bit more about the matter than some random internet "expert"

:grinning:
 
Difficult to be specific without seeing the exact circumstances but, in relation to the car, there are matters the police can pursue/ticket in relation to obstruction of the footpath and also driving on the footpath. Good evidence is, for example when a pram/pushchair has to venture out into a busy road due to a car parked on the footpath. The lady should have taken a picture. Having said that, police don`t seem to take action in many cases these days. But if there were images and witnesses they might be "pressured into it". In relation to damage to the car that would depend how it happened and whether the damage was intentional, reckless etc. when it could become a police matter. If it was purely accidental when the pushchair was being navigated through a narrow gap then the car owner would have to mount a civil claim - but would probably lose if there were any independent witnesses to the car being parked on the pavement limiting the progress of pedestrians etc.
 
Back in the 90s quite few of us tried to raise awareness of the social and environmental problems that had arisen, and would multiply, as a result of allowing the private motor car to be the dominant mode of transport. We argued that building more roads would only temporarily ease congestion, and that ultimately it would simply lead to more congestion and the need to build yet more roads.

We also argued that having millions of cars driving about with just a single occupant was an absurd and damaging demonstration of individual liberty, especially when there were/are numerous alternatives. We argued that there are other forms of transport which could transport many people at a fraction of the environmental and social cost.

For us, the streets meant more than just roads for cars. We believed (and many of us still believe) that the streets should be a place for people, not just cars. "Ultimately it is in the streets where power must be dissolved: for the streets where daily life is endured, suffered, and eroded,and where power is confronted and fought, must be turned into the domain where daily life is enjoyed, created and nourished".

We climbed up trees and made our homes in them and we literally went underground, digging and occupying tunnels, all in an effort to stop the roads being built and the dominance of the car increasing yet further.

Not only this, we also, sometimes, turned the streets into temporary autonomous zones where people, not cars, were able to flourish. Anybody who was there will know that not only were we having a fucking great party, we were using the streets for a far greater purpose: to make serious political arguments against the reliance upon the fucking motor-car.

In short, we Reclaimed the Streets! It was a lot of fun but it was also serious. Unfortunately not enough people listened to us.

If you want a taste, watch this:

For a more complete picture, watch this:

Attach files
 
Rule 244 of the Highway Code states that you "should not" park either fully or partially on the pavement. In London it says you "must not". So the interpretation is that it's only advisory not to park on the pavement outside of London. The government are reviewing the law this year, so don't expect any clarification anytime soon!
 
Highway Code. Rule 145 states: “You MUST NOT drive on or over a pavement, footpath or bridleway except to gain lawful access to property, or in the case of an emergency.”
How do you park on a pavement without driving on (and subsequently off) it. Perhaps a crowd of guys all got together and lifted the car on.
Unfortunately policing is another thing we pay for but don't get, particularly in rural areas.
 
Bert said:
How do you park on a pavement without driving on (and subsequently off) it. Perhaps a crowd of guys all got together and lifted the car on.
Click to expand...

I think you're taking it a bit too literally. Most people would view that as meaning you can't drive down a pavement for an extended period of time/distance as opposed to not venturing onto it at all, even for a second to park.
 
Rule 244 mentioned above by LSB2:-

"You MUST NOT park partially or wholly on the pavement in London, and should not do so elsewhere unless signs permit it. Parking on the pavement can obstruct and seriously inconvenience pedestrians, people in wheelchairs or with visual impairments and people with prams or pushchairs.
Law GL(GP)A sect 15"

That shows clearly that unless there are signs to say you can park then it is illegal to do so.
 
You beat me to it Burning Blue. There are various pieces of legislation that deal with the different types of obstruction and driving on the pavement etc. Highway Code is often used in court to aid a prosecution but it is not, in itself, law. Thing is, policing is in absolute crisis right now and, at present, there`s insufficient resource to enable local police to prioritise matters as outlined in the OP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.