ADUK Archive

adiNigel wrote:For the legal side to not apply, the land mustn't be accessible to the general public (a supermarket car park is publicly accessible) and you must have the permission of the owner.

Nigel

My understanding is that you need a licence to drive on a road that is accessible to the public rather than any such land.

RTA 1988 wrote:
S 87.
Drivers of motor vehicles to have driving licences.
— (1) It is an offence for a person to drive on a road a motor vehicle of any class otherwise than in accordance with a licence authorising him to drive a motor vehicle of that class.

S 192.
General interpretation of Act.
— (1) In this Act—

“road”

F3 (a), in relation to England and Wales, means any highway and any other road to which the public has access, and includes bridges over which a road passes...

Of course any definition that includes the word that it is trying to define is bound to cause confusion.

MGF wrote:My understanding is that you need a licence to drive on a road that is accessible to the public rather than any such land.

....

Of course any definition that includes the word that it is trying to define is bound to cause confusion.

In Scotland the definition or a road (under the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984) is much wider and it has always been accepted that all road traffic law extends to most private car parks (and other non road like areas) unless they are fenced off or notices prohibit public access (and indeed the police have brought many successful prosecutions), but until recently the situation has been less clear cut in England and Wales - and the police have been reluctant to bring prosecutions to the CPS.

Following a ruling in the English appeal courts last month where a civil penalty for parking on a pavement by a doctor whose practice owned the strip of land involved was upheld; the law may been clarified so that the situation in Scotland does now apply in England and Wales as well (media report). Unless/until further appeals contradict this ruling, it seems to me that it would be prudent to assume that all road traffic law extends to most private land which is not fenced off and gated.

Ah yes. I must apologise for referring to England and Wales in a way that might be construed as the whole of the UK. You are right that the RTA 1988 defines a road in Scotland so as to include the definition in the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984.

However I am not sure of the relevance of the quoted case to the definition of a road (although I have not been able to find the judgement itself).

As an insurance person (micaheal769) you may have heard of the House of Lords case of Cutter v Eagle Star?

As far as I know this is the authority for defining a road. (The Court of Appeal cannot change the authority of these opinions).

Lord Clyde wrote:
It is important to observe that the consideration of access by the public only arises if the place is a road. It may well be that the public has access to it but that is not enough…..In the present case the question is raised whether one or other or both of the car parks qualifies as a road. In the generality of the matter it seems to me that in the ordinary use of language a car park does not so qualify. In character and more especially in function they are distinct. It is of course possible to park on a road, but that does not mean that the road is a car park. Correspondingly one can drive from one point to another over a car park, but that does not mean that the route which has been taken is a road. It is here that the distinction in function between road and car park is of importance. The proper function of a road is to enable movement along it to a destination. Incidentally a vehicle on it may be stationary. One can use a road for parking. The proper function of a car park is to enable vehicles to stand and wait. A car may be driven across it; but that is only incidental to the principal function of parking. A hard shoulder may be seen to form part of a road. A more delicate question could arise with regard to a lay-by, but where it is designed to serve only as a temporary stopping place incidental to the function of the road it may well be correct to treat it as part of the road. While I would accept that circumstances can occur where an area of land which can be reasonably described as a car park could qualify as a road for the purposes of the legislation I consider that such circumstances would be somewhat exceptional.

Reading onto the more boring bits their Lordships were agreed that the definition should not be interpreted widely.

For the purposes of insurance cover the legislation has been amended so as to include roads "or other public place". However the legislation on licences, as far as I can see, has not been changed. (I will have a look on an up-to-date database to confirm).

MGF wrote:
As an insurance person (micaheal769) you may have heard of the House of Lords case of Cutter v Eagle Star?

Most authorities report Cutter vs Eagle Star as being with respect to Sect 145 (the requirement to hold insurance), but I agree that it seems to extend beyond that.

I have not seen the ruling yet so it's hard to say what impact it will have (just because it is set down in a lower court does not mean it cannot change the law in this area as long as the detailed ruling makes reference to Cutter v Eagle Star and how it reinterprets its effects). It usually takes some time for these things to be digested and their implications (if indeed there are any) to be fully understood. Time will tell.

In the meantime I'm sure most people would not fancy finding themselves getting caught up, appeals are pretty expensive and stressful for most of us!

A word is generally interpreted the same throughout a piece of legislation unless the legislation states otherwise. That is why the definition of road in S145 should also apply to S87. Obviously the word "road" has been added to with "public place" in S145 but the important rule in Cutter is that the definition of 'road' in the RTA 1988 should not be constructed with reference to public access. One first needs to define a road then ask whether or not it is publicly accessible. Public access is irrelevant to the definition of a road (although it is relevant to whether or not a licence is needed to drive on such a road).

The case you have linked to does not concern the RTA. It is about whether or not Local Authorities can ticket parked vehicles on privately owned but publicly accessible land that adjoins the highway. The fact that they can doesn't seem surprising to me although I understood that the public must have a right of way over that land rather than just unrestricted physical access to it as a matter of fact.

However, I don't see how that decision affects the definition of "road" in the RTA 1988 where the definition has been clearly qualified by the House of Lords. (One should be very cautious about interpreting one piece of legislation by reference to the interpretation of another.)

As far as I can see the law is sufficiently well settled in England and Wales for it to be unnecessary to have a licence to drive on dedicated car parks off the main road.

Probably best for someone with more experience to take your daughter out for some additional practice. Something that might help with the bay parking is to find a marker in the car so you know when to turn. I practiced my bay parking with a family member and I was terrible at it and then my instructor taught me how to do it and it just made things so much simpler. I line up a marker in the car (i use my door lock) with the line two lines away from the space that I want to go into and then put on a full steering lock. Slowly go into the space and take off the steering as necessary (I normally take the steering off as quickly as I put it on once about half the car is in the space).

Mitch

mitchr wrote:Probably best for someone with more experience to take your daughter out for some additional practice

Thanx Mitch, I agree. It did seem like a good idea at the time

mitchr wrote:
I line up a marker in the car (i use my door lock) with the line two lines away from the space that I want to go into and then put on a full steering lock. Slowly go into the space and take off the steering as necessary (I normally take the steering off as quickly as I put it on once about half the car is in the space).

My instructor - and hers - did the same, well he used to use a highlighter pen and put a mark on his rear window, when you lined it up you started to turn. That seemed okay, my problem and hers is once you are halfway there, ie once your car is halfway in space, its the unwinding of the wheel that caused problems for me and for my daughter. She had lesson the other day, and still does exactly the same thing. Forgets how much to unwind the wheel and messes it up. Especially the reverse round corner, she never ends up where she shoud be. The instructor tells her, to sort it, move the car and look where you are going that way you can adjust your steering, she still hasnt got hang of it though!! and yet her actual driving is spot on!!

It is better not to practice set pieces.

Take vehicle to open area and just reverse it - Mind Driving explains this

ROG wrote:It is better not to practice set pieces.

Take vehicle to open area and just reverse it - Mind Driving explains this

this was my reasoning behind wanting to take her out myself. When you have an hours lesson, probably only 10-15 mins would be on reversing - specfic moves. From my own tests I know it wasnt enough for me, and from watching her I know she is struggling the same!!

Think I will invest in Mind Driving....getting meself quite a lil library collection

ROG wrote:It is better not to practice set pieces.

Take vehicle to open area and just reverse it - Mind Driving explains this

Oh I just got Mind Driving today. It looks like a really good book from the 5 minute flick through I had earlier

Mitch

mitchr wrote:Oh I just got Mind Driving today. It looks like a really good book from the 5 minute flick through I had earlier

I must admit ive got this thing at the moment, of borrowing or acquiring really old books about driving - the older the better - its fascinating stuff!!