I'm speechless... [Archive] - SV650.org - SV650 & Gladius 650 Forum

BillyC

01-12-09, 12:05 PM

I don't believe this, I really am dumbfounded and shocked at this decision.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8388077.stm

A decision, made by a reasoned Judge / Magistrate. I'm appalled. Instigated by a Conversative LibDem council... it's the kind of actions I'd expect from New Labour.

I'm physically sickened to read this.

jambo

01-12-09, 12:13 PM

Camden are currently doing something quite impressive.

I've always claimed when I come to power I will put Westminster council up against the wall as an example to others. However, Camden are actually making me consider them the more worthy of being used to prove this point.

Quite an achievement given my long-standing disagreement with Westminster's total lack of honesty and integrity.

Jambo

BillyC

01-12-09, 12:19 PM

Given that it has been recognised that Dr Dawood owns the "sub soil", but not the paving on top of it, and it is now recognised as publicly usable land - I propose that he should start charging Camden rent.

To bring things up to date, I would suggest an initial figure of £10,000, and £1,000 per annum thereafter.

I'm still disgusted... this is literally disgusting. It's nothing short of theft and extortion.

Sosha

01-12-09, 12:28 PM

:compcrash:

Even this annoyed me now....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8109882.stm

Cheers... :rolleyes:

metalmonkey

01-12-09, 12:44 PM

:compcrash:

Even this annoyed me now....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8109882.stm

Cheers... :rolleyes:

Totally agree is it not a matter for the police to decide if the vehicle is parked in a dangerous postion? It looks like now those who are meant to serve us will use any means, to get hold of our harded earned.

But as per Billy's link if they are talking about going to people's land which is their's to give a tickect. Surley that is trespass?

BillyC

01-12-09, 01:32 PM

This isn't just a few parking attendents being challenged by the occupants of a street... this is the ruling from a court. It's really very serious and potentially has an impact on the whole population. It sets a very concerning precident in law.

timwilky

01-12-09, 02:11 PM

Isn't somebody on the org also having similar arguments about parking their bike on private land and being ticketed because there is public access?

Spiderman

01-12-09, 03:22 PM

Billy, good find mate. I may well try and get in touch with the good doctor as i have documents from the NAEA national association of estate agents) as well as from Land Registry that say a "freehold" effectively means "ownership of the land from the core of the earth to the upper limits of the atmosphere" so if he owns that land freehold he should take that argument to appeal too. Chances are those he only owns the leasehold and thus it becomes a grey area.

Its a ridiculous ruling for sure as this issue had been contested before and the ruling prior to this was that if there are signs clearly displayed that make say this is private land then you can park there. I've argued and won a ticket on this basis a few times.

If the good doctor was smart he'd continue to park there and ensure that both his wheels are off the ground, since the definition of parking is having one or more wheels on the pavement. All he'd have to do is get an extended centre stand and balance his bike well ;)

carty

01-12-09, 03:49 PM

Spiderman

01-12-09, 03:58 PM

I don't see the issue. The article say's the guy is effectively parking on the pavement ...

No mate, you missed the point. The area he parks on is HIS land, its part of his building in the same way as say a cafe or greengrocers have the right to use the section outside their premises.
Camden have effectively (probably thru the use of some funny handshakes no doubt) got a ruling saying he only owns the soil under the paving slabs out there and by parking on the slabs he's not parking on his own land.

Also if you saw how some of the bike bays are used you too would not want to park you bike in one. Well not unless you like the idea of returning to your bike to find it scratched and dented from other scooter riders forcing their bikes into spaces that are way too small.

amnesia

01-12-09, 04:14 PM

I would be interested to see photographs of the area he parks in, just to put it into context.

carty

01-12-09, 04:23 PM

Maybe it is his land and maybe it isn't - my point is that if there is a question over it then he could have saved himself and others a lot of time and money by parking elsewhere and awaiting confirmation that he could park there. He may feel he has a right to park there, and maybe he should have a right to park there, but sheer bloody-mindedness has earned him a large bill for fines, therefore I have no sympathy.

Regarding scratches on bikes, I have seen many bike bays in and around London and understand what you mean, but from what I've seen people know their bikes will get scuffed up and therefore own older bikes that they are not worried about, I'm sure this chap is the same. :)

blueto

01-12-09, 04:30 PM

ONly in England eh!

Spiderman

01-12-09, 04:33 PM

Maybe it is his land and maybe it isn't

No its quite clearly is his land in the same way as your front garden is clearly your land. Would you not fight it if some jobsworth stuck a ticket on your vehicle when you had parked it in your front garden? Course you would!
This is the issue. Camden are taking away from him what is his and claiming it to be theirs only to raise some more money. If the fella is actually obstructing the pathway then fair enough but the fact that Camden have squashed some of his tickets as the article says means to me that he has been right to park there and Camden have conceded that on more then one occasion.

Also your assumption of his bike being one of the old ones etc...big leap to make there isnt it mate? I have one form of transport, my bike. And its my pride and joy. I'm sure as a doctor he probably owns a car too but i dont know that for a fact. All i know is he is being penalised for nothing. Its legalised mugging imo.

carty

01-12-09, 05:03 PM

Spidey, how is it 'clearly his land'- he say's it is and the council says it isn't, according to the article. It also refers to the land as a pavement, which pedestrians can use. If it is 100% definitive that he owns all of the land then of course it is stupid ge is being fined for parking there, but given that it is used as a pavement and therefore a public right of way that is not clear is it?

Regarding his bike, they refer to it as a scooter that is used to nip out to see patients and is quite happy to leave in the middle of the pavement, do you think it would be a minter / his pride and joy?!

All I'm saying is if it was me, if I believed I owned the land but knew I would get fined if I parked there, I would not park there and would contest the issue through the official means rather than racking up a load of fines on the off chance they'd be overturned.

ArtyLady

01-12-09, 05:22 PM

... if I believed I owned the land but knew I would get fined if I parked there, I would not park there and would contest the issue through the official means rather than racking up a load of fines on the off chance they'd be overturned.

Are you serious?!! :o if I owned the land I'd continue parking there and fight my corner! how dare they tell him he can't park on his own land :mad:

carty

01-12-09, 05:26 PM

Yes I'm serious- there's no way I'd risk £10,000 rather than walk a few yards to my scooter...

Milky Bar Kid

01-12-09, 05:30 PM

This is where I don't understand English law! This wouldn't happen up here!

ArtyLady

01-12-09, 05:31 PM

This is where I don't understand English law! This wouldn't happen up here!

Stand by for a mass influx! ;)

Milky Bar Kid

01-12-09, 05:32 PM

It's a confusing one. We don't have such a thing as trespass, and land laws are different.

Spiderman

01-12-09, 05:37 PM

Spidey, how is it 'clearly his land'-

Simply by virtue of the court saying he owns the subsoil mate. they are attempting to define how he owns the land...not that he does or he doesnt.

Image you lived on the corner of a road and decided not to have a wall or hedge around your front garden...then lazy people decided to take a short cut across your land. Does this make it a pavement? According to Camden it does, this is how they are stitching this guy up.

As someone said earlier i too would like to see the location for myself but the fact this guy was incensed enough to fight this all the way and run up such a huge bill meant he was sure he was being done over...otherwise as you rightly say he'd have to be a fool to not park down the road and walk if he really thought he was trying it on and didnt have a leg to stand on.

i fight parking tickets all the time, some i know i'm onto a looser with and trust me, when you know you're gonna loose you just pay up.

ArtyLady

01-12-09, 05:38 PM

So can he appeal? and if so where too? :confused:

ophic

01-12-09, 05:42 PM

How does this piece of land differ from a driveway? If its not distinguishable, anyone with an ungated driveway could get ticketed for leaving their car parked on it.

Bluefish

01-12-09, 06:45 PM

BillyC

01-12-09, 06:56 PM

Carty - I'm afraid, like Spidy, I think you've completely and utterly missed the point.

This ruling sets a precedent in law. It means that if you own some land, that is accessible by the public - you can't use it without incurring public penalty.

As the article states - if you have a driveway without a gate, your vehicle can be ticketed by a warden. If you don't think that's a big deal, or doesn't apply to you, then I suggest you reconsider its meaning.

Unfortunately, appeal was denied, but I don't know just what that means in the grand scheme of things - law lords, european courts etc. I'm sure it infringes one Human Right or another.

BillyC

01-12-09, 06:58 PM

i presume the land in question is like a forcourt and so not fenced gated, hence the public walk over it all the time, as it is an extension of the pavement, but this does not stop him from owning the land and therefor being allowed to park on it, fecking councils they are only out to get money, he should appeal to brussels. i don't miss working in camden and westminster that's for sure, iv'e only had one parking ticket in the six years i've worked oop north.

Exactly - my interpretation is that it is a small strip of land, behind the flag stones (the separation is usually clearly visible), between the public pavement, and the wall of a building.

This boundary has long been respected and adhered to - the mere fact that pedestrians are able to walk along it is simply for their convenience - a gift if you like.

Spiderman

01-12-09, 07:01 PM

Ok, ive looked up the good doctor on the interwebly like thing i have here. The only address i can find for him is a clinic at 29 fleet street. Looking on google street view, which either must be an old image or his website address is old, either way its a row of shops with the glass blocks in the pavement. For many years this had been a grey area for parking laws. I know of people who fought tickets for parking on these and won. Technically the ground floor shop unit (usually) also owns the basement and these glass bricks are part of that basement. they allow light in. We used to have these at a shop i worked at and the basement section extends to under this area. Some pubs have converted the glass block to allow for a delivery hatch for barrels etc to be delivered direct to the basement and they sure as hell do block the pavement fully when they get their deliveries.

So all in all i cant see how the judge has decided its not his to use as he please. Yes the public do have access to walk over it but surely this can be seen as a nice gesture from all the shop owners, cos if they all decided to put barriers around these bits then not only would it reduce the pavement size but also detract from the beauty of the high street.
Having one scooter sitting on this part is no issue imo, i used to park on the same thing outside the shop where i worked from time to time when i knew i;d be going out again shortly and it made no sense to park round the back and waste 5 mins walking to and fro.

Spiderman

01-12-09, 07:03 PM

A for appeal (sorry, i'm post wh*ring now, lol) i believe the next step is a judicial review.

BillyC

01-12-09, 07:11 PM

Spidy... a similar article on the Telegraph site says that his offices are in Cleveland Street:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6691961/Doctor-loses-court-battle-over-fines-for-parking-on-his-own-land.html

ArtyLady

01-12-09, 07:18 PM

I wonder what would happen if he enclosed it with a small fence that didn't need any planning permisson?

Spiderman

01-12-09, 07:22 PM

Thanks Billy, cleveland street is on of those very long street and i can pinpoint his place on it sadly.

i'm infuriated that the judge has denied him the right to appeal and justified it by saying "at least if saves you the very costly process of a full appeal" WTF?!?!?!? How is that a fair thing to do?

Stu

01-12-09, 08:13 PM

I don't see the issue. The article say's the guy is effectively parking on the pavement and there is a free motorcycle bay a few metres away. He's parking there because he can't be bothered to walk the few metres.

He could have avoided a lot of wasted time and money by parking in the free cycle bay. I have no sympathy.
You sir, are a ... :roll:
I'll maybe forgive you for being from Brum and not experienced a London Parking bay. You might as well throw your bike in a skip & then come back for it at the end of the day for the condition it will be in.
Taken to it's conclusion you wouldn't be allowed to park on your own driveway - for someone to say oh it's alright just park it out on the street wtf. :smt009

01-12-09, 08:40 PM

The sort of land described is often open to the public. If there are public rights of way over the land then a ticket would be right, for obstructing the public access. I wonder whether he had a Highways Act notice up - you can put up a notice saying that it is not intended that the public should obtain rights of way. Section 32 Highways Act 1980 from memory.

My drive is open to the road. I don't own just the subsoil, I own the surface too, I don't see how some plank could give me a ticket there.

Stu

01-12-09, 08:43 PM

I replied when I read Carty's 1st reply, but for him to keep at it ? :smt102 ...I'm speechlss too.

http://www.4rfv.co.uk/fulllisting.asp?scategory=295
has CompanyAradco VSI LtdContactRichard Dawood - DirectorAddress132 Cleaveland StreetIs that even in Camden? looks like Westminster to me.

Spiderman

01-12-09, 08:44 PM

... I wonder whether he had a Highways Act notice up - you can put up a notice saying that it is not intended that the public should obtain rights of way. Section 32 Highways Act 1980 from memory.

According to the article Ed, he had! I dont know if he'd quoted the Act itself or not but he had also demarcated the area with potted plants.

Biker Biggles

01-12-09, 09:12 PM

According to the article Ed, he had! I dont know if he'd quoted the Act itself or not but he had also demarcated the area with pot plants.

He's lucky he didnt get busted for dealing class B drugs.:cool:

But seriously----Theres people who are prepared to fight mindless authority and this guy seems to be one.Good for him.Shame there arent more like him.
But the majority are just the downtrodden compliant(horrible word)lumpen who can always think of a reason not to object to the whims of the authoritarians,:mad:

Spiderman

01-12-09, 09:28 PM

Agree BB, i with we'd known about this guys stand before now. What we could have done apart from give him some moral support tho i dont know.

fatneck

01-12-09, 10:26 PM

He should rip up the paving stones that someone put on his land. Then park on his topsoil, job done!

Lucas

01-12-09, 10:43 PM

omg

Bluefish

01-12-09, 10:50 PM

He should rip up the paving stones that someone put on his land. Then park on his topsoil, job done!

why not, allthough then they would say he was illegally transporting his bike over the pavement to get to his parking spot/subsoil. lol

Spiderman

01-12-09, 11:27 PM

Or they'd do him for criminal damage :roll: Seems they have it in for this guy. But as said earlier he should wriet to the council asking them to pay rent for use of his topsoil or come and remove their slabs as they had not sought his permission to lay them there.

ixlr8

02-12-09, 03:40 AM

Stand by for a mass influx! ;)

Pardons if I've posted this before but, in Victoria, we're allowed to park on any footpath unless otherwise specified - several narrow paths in the central business district. Very handy indeed!

Bri w

02-12-09, 09:05 AM

why not, allthough then they would say he was illegally transporting his bike over the pavement to get to his parking spot/subsoil. lol

Its not just London!

I got ticketed in Leicester for crossing the public pavement to park on a private piece of land in front of the building where I was working.

carty

02-12-09, 09:30 AM

I replied when I read Carty's 1st reply, but for him to keep at it ? :smt102 ...I'm speechlss too.

Are you addressing anyone there chap, or just generally typing at the forum? :smt075

My point was that I have no sympathy with him being fined when he could have taken greater steps to avoid it all.

I hate it when people jump on band-wagons 'oh the injustice', 'oh how terrible this all is', 'oh soon nobody is going to be allowed to park directly outside their house on their own private, gated drive'.

I hate that the BBC has dressed this up as 'poor doctor just wants to be able to serve his patients quickly by parking really close to work and nasty Camden Council have outlawed it via a technicality'. There could be many other sides to this story. Maybe his scooter parked there actually does cause a hazard to pedestrians, maybe the good doctor is a nasty barsteward and he threatens to beat up the traffic warden each time he sees him. Maybe he slept with the Camden mayor's wife. Who knows.

I initially countered in this thread because of Billy's first post that said he was 'speechless' and 'physically sickened' by the article. I can't imagine how you feel when you read something really bad, like war, poverty, etcetera, etcetera...

And Stu, I know of London bike bays, as I said to Spidey earlier, we are talking about a doctor's runaround scooter, not a brand new Desmosedici. He could have bought ten new scooters for the value of his fines....

I think we're (me vs everyone else) going to have to agree to disagree here, I'll sit in this corner on my own :)

Grinch

02-12-09, 09:59 AM

Mmmh interesting. I read this yesterday and I was rather taken back by it too, but I would like to see how it progresses.

Spiderman

02-12-09, 03:49 PM

Carty..... this is a good pic to make my point mate.

http://i393.photobucket.com/albums/pp17/SpidermanSV/cleveland.jpg

As you can see in the foreground, some of the businesses use their glass block area as access to the lower level and others just allow for the glass block to remain and give light. So what i dont get is how its fair or correct to penalise anyone who chooses to park a scooter there.

Iin the interests of fairness i've used a section of Cleveland street which is where the articles says his surgery is but not his exact surgery as i cant find that. However the principle is the same.

If the judge has ruled the guy only owns the subsoil then how come these others are allowed to erect fencing and install stairs, all measures that permanently reduce the width of the pavement, whereas the doc only reduces the width of the pavement when his bike is parked there and he's not of visiting patients or the g*lf course?

gettin2dizzy

03-12-09, 04:36 PM

Iin the interests of fairness i've used a section of Cleveland street which is where the articles says his surgery is but not his exact surgery as i cant find that. However the principle is the same.

It's here.
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=cleveland+street,+london&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=13.544511,39.506836&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Cleveland+St,+London,+United+Kingdom&ll=51.523351,-0.142243&spn=0.006956,0.01929&z=16&layer=c&cbll=51.523287,-0.142147&panoid=DwPQVfeMwOlUpMxM43o77g&cbp=12,8.01,,0,9.3
Brown door on the right is his office. Motorcycle bay in the article on the left.

Spiderman

03-12-09, 04:46 PM

It's here.
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=cleveland+street,+london&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=13.544511,39.506836&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Cleveland+St,+London,+United+Kingdom&ll=51.523351,-0.142243&spn=0.006956,0.01929&z=16&layer=c&cbll=51.523287,-0.142147&panoid=DwPQVfeMwOlUpMxM43o77g&cbp=12,8.01,,0,9.3
Brown door on the right is his office. Motorcycle bay in the article on the left.

Cheers G2D, good find. How did you find the address out of curiosity? I searched loads and got bored you see, lol.

But just goes to prove my point more i think. If he parks between those 2 plants on the pavement then where is the problem?
Personally i'm more fearful of bike bays that have cars bays butting up to them as more than once i have seen an incompetent person parking and reversing into one of the parked bikes. Hey presto, bike dominoes. ANd do they hang about to leave their details? This is london, what do you think?

gettin2dizzy

03-12-09, 04:59 PM

Cheers G2D, good find. How did you find the address out of curiosity? I searched loads and got bored you see, lol.

I googled his name and clinic, then used whois on his domain.
Administrative Contact Address1: 132 Cleveland Street
It's the lack of any free parking in town that bugs me. In my village that has no problems with congestion, I have to pay so I can pop to the bank. A few free 30 minute zones would suffice.

I was also in Sidcup the other day and couldn't find a single free parking space - even in residential areas miles from any businesses. I was staying there for a few days and had to pay to park between 1-3pm in the councils car park. Just a lot of ****ing hassle for minimal revenue. :rolleyes:

Morons with authority needing their power-fix to make up for the fact their wives are overweight and ugly (I guess ;) )

yorkie_chris

03-12-09, 05:00 PM

maybe the good doctor is a nasty barsteward and he threatens to beat up the traffic warden each time he sees him. Maybe he slept with the Camden mayor's wife. Who knows.

Given how this lot sounds I wouldn't blame him for battering the odd traffic warden. I reckon it should be allowed like every 3rd Wednesday a month, let the kids blow off some steam!
And if he's shagged the mayors wife, good on him :smt043

gettin2dizzy

03-12-09, 05:20 PM

Given how this lot sounds I wouldn't blame him for battering the odd traffic warden. I reckon it should be allowed like every 3rd Wednesday a month, let the kids blow off some steam!
And if he's shagged the mayors wife, good on him :smt043
Don't **** with your doctor. He's got access to the 'fun' cupboard.

Stu

04-12-09, 12:51 AM

http://www.4rfv.co.uk/fulllisting.asp?scategory=295 CompanyAradco VSI LtdContactRichard Dawood - DirectorAddress132 Cleaveland Street

I googled his name and clinic, then used whois on his domain.

So I wasn't any help? :smt090

Stu

04-12-09, 01:01 AM

But just goes to prove my point more i think. If he parks between those 2 plants on the pavement then where is the problem?
Unfortunately I would disagree.
If he's got all the dark shaded part of the pavement I would put 2 much more substantial planters that reached out to the edge. Then his bike in the middle definitely wouldn't be in amongst the natural flow of pedestrians.
I had imagined a whole row of pot plants in a row which his bike was behind. But I reckon his bike would stick out more than those 2 plants.
I'm all for being able to do what you like with your own land (eg park on it) but I believe if you leave your land open like that and then block it by parking you can be ticketed.

The law is an ass, but as it stands I think he should have done more to block and demarcate his land.

Spiderman

04-12-09, 01:07 AM

No, its a fair point Stu. I too expect more plants than that tbh and if it were my place i too would have much wider planters to make by scooter seem less significant.
But they didnt do the fella for his choice of shrubbery, they argued the soil under there is his and everything on top is Camden's. Devious buggers.