Parking Ticket - 10mins on Lordship Lane

[ali2007]

Hi there - just wanted to sound everyone out and ask for some advice. I parked on Lordship Lane for 15mins. The street sign permits parking if you're loading for 30mins. I un-loaded and dropped some pieces to the charity shop. Then went to M&S and purchased some items and 'reloaded' my car. On my return the ticket warden was there and said that the ticket couldn't be revoked as he hadn't witnessed loading for the 2mins he was there. I was in the parking spot for 15mins and have the M&S receipt (which the Warden suggested I present if I wanted to dispute the ticket). Another lady/car arrived while I was chatting to the warden - she wanted to park in the same parking spot to buy paint from Leyland which she would then load into her car. He told her not to park there as as she would get a ticket. So my question, has anyone disputed a ticket in similar circumstances and actually won. To be clear I was NOT in a loading bay. I was parked on the side of the street on LL close-ish to ESPH. Street sign says you're allowed to park for loading for 30mins. I parked at 11:20am so it was after the early morning restrictions. Southwark's website does not state that you have to be with your vehicle the entire time if you're loading (as that's obviously impossible). Any thoughts welcome, thanks! A

[alice]

What you described does not constitute loading.  Maybe it should but it doesn’t.

[teddyboy23]

.

Edited October 11 by teddyboy23

[ali2007]

Thanks for both your replies, I did some digging online and IF it's for good vehicles only (which is what you describe above) it should say GOODS VEHICLE ONLY on the sign. It doesn't. 

I was issued with a parking contravention 25.

Online it states that if you're loading you have to be with your car at all times - so I'm not sure why these signs are even on the high street when most people are loading/unloading shopping which is not permitted.

Lesson learned. Thanks anyway 🙂

[Rockets]

Ali - many, many people have fallen foul of that - it's a very lucrative revenue spot for the council and a few people have posted about the "what actually constitutes loading" as it is very ambiguous - I am not sure how anyone loading or unloading can be with their vehicle for the duration - unless they were just leaving whatever they were unloading on the roadside. Clearly the sign should be clearer but it probably makes a lot of revenue for the council.

[malumbu]

Ah, another opportunity spotted to tout the usual lines about greedy Southwark fleecing the poor motorist - it's never ending (either the number of fines or the number of time there are posts on this😃).

OK to be more constructive, I hadn't realised what the sign meant so grateful for the OP.  The fact that I and many others didn't know, suggests that there should be greater clarity.  This is a matter for government, so suggest write to Ellie and ask her to raise it with the Transport Secretary to consider improving signage.

I'd dispute it just to see what the response with.  I've had zero success in disputing penalty notices over the years, so now make sure I don't get them. 

[Rockets]

Malumbu - you seem a bit torn on this one - one the one hand you're taking the position of "Rockets having a go at the council" and then one sentence later you admit "yes, it's very ambiguous". Why is it a matter for government - it's the council's sign......the government didn't put the sign up or collects the revenue?

[KalamityKel]

My shopping, from a supermarket/normal highstreet shop, has never looked like the image used on the sign... 🤔 I must buy more tomatoes next time...

I usually tend to overthink things (life in general) but I've always interpreted such a sign to mean very simply it's for goods loading (deliveries) for the shop not for customer buying directly from the site. Why is there any confusion?

[snowy]

It's not a council designed sign either, and its location is most likely set by national guidelines.

[Rockets]

36 minutes ago, KalamityKel said:

My shopping, from a supermarket/normal highstreet shop, has never looked like the image used on the sign... 🤔 I must buy more tomatoes next time...

Or maybe just use a trolley and a big box! But it is somewhat concerning is it not that even if you did replicate the trolley and box then, according to the traffic wardens, you could not actually move it anywhere......hmmmmmmm.....

Seems somewhat ambiguous does it not?

[snowy]

No, there's clear guidance in the highway code on it. The code you're meant to learn and keep up to date with in order to have a driving license and be responsible for a large and potentially dangerous vehicle on public roads. 
 

TfL even tell you how to deal with non commercial loading unloading and traffic wardens. 

[malumbu]

Very few drivers get any refresher or advanced training after their test.  A few years ago, I think it was under Labour, young/new drivers were encouraged to do further training, and I recall that this can reduce what can be enormous insurance premiums.  But not sure that this took off and there is also resentment about black boxes.

So you can pass your test at 17 and have no refresher training for 70 years or more.  For most the only post-test training is speed awareness courses.

Now if you had a programme of random retesting 90 percent plus would fail.  Poor observations, poor signalling, poor positioning, poor anticipation.

But the resistance to any compulsion to improve driving skills would be massive and lose any government significant votes.

Oh my word, I appear to have some experience on this subject.

Probably more relevant to the Dulwich Roads thread.

[Spartacus]

I guess the same applies for all road users Mal, even cyclists who may pass a basic test when they are at school.

Now if you had a programme of random retesting 90 percent plus would fail.  Poor observations, poor signalling, poor positioning, poor anticipation, jumping red lights, cycling on the pavement, not using lights. 

The cloth cuts two ways 😅

[malumbu]

There is no driving test for cyclists.  There is for drivers.  Bikes are not registered.  Cars are.  You don't need insurance for riding a bike.  You do not need an annual roadworthy test after three years for bikes.  We are comparing apples with pears.  You can't justify poor driving standards with your standard response of "oh what about cyclists".  Do you have any views otherwise of what I posted above?

[Spartacus]

Mal, I'm simply pointing out that you take ever opportunity to bash cars and drivers and yet here again you display double standards when someone points out that all road users need to follow the rules. 

This thread was about a loading bay and it's use yet you single handedly hijacked it for for your own purposes.

You winge and complain about multiple threads on the same topic but here you demonstrate beautifully that you are a one trick pony.