'We regret the error but we are determined to rectify it as soon as possible so traffic can flow freely. We would urge all residents to to please be considerate to others and do not park and do not park all day in a prime site on-street if you can avoid it.' -- David Monroe, Surrey County Council

Guildford has been forced to admit that its on-street parking is not lawful. Over the past four years this unlawful scheme has raised 2.8 million, all of which Guildford is obliged to pay back. The entire parking scheme has now been suspended until further notice. Suspension of the scheme is costing 2,200 a day.

 http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/2035568_legal_blunder_leads_to_free_parking_in_guildford

This came to light, not because of any legal challenge, but due to an internal audit when it was found the scheme had not been correctly administered.

To their credit, Guildford has at least admitted they got it wrong and offered a refund. This is more than has happened elsewhere where councils have tried to brazen it out and refused to give any refunds, in many cases now committing fraud by raising money on an unlawful scheme. And at least one council, Leeds, is now facing criminal action.

At nearby Farnborough, the parking scheme in North Camp is illegal. Their was no consultation, the lines on the street are not compliant with Traffic Regulations, the signs are not compliant with Traffic Regulations, many of the signs are obscured by the foliage from hanging baskets.

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/07/404310.html?c=on
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/07/404836.html

The local council, the Rotten Borough of Rushmoor, has been advised that the scheme is not lawful, but instead of suspending the scheme cf Guildford, has decided to brazen it out and not give refunds as it gives out the wrong message, with the councillor responsible claiming it did not matter how the lines were painted!

Behind the scenes, Rushmoor is carrying out a review, but as it is being carried out by the same people who imposed the scheme, therefore no one can have any confidence in the review. Any one with a view should contact Mike Bamber, the official responsible.

 mbamber@rushmoor.gov.uk

In the meantime, local traders are suffering loss of trade and residents in neighbouring streets are suffering the nuisance from displacement parking.

In Ealing, that the lines do not comply with Traffic Regulations, has been dismissed as a 'technical problem', and in any case no big deal as several other London Authorities are at it too! Ealing is refusing to correct its 'technical problem', even thought its 'technical problem' means it is breaking the law. A matter for PC Plod?

 http://neilherron.blogspot.com/2008/08/council-law-breaking-technical-problem.html
 http://ealingtimes.co.uk/news/localnews/3632134.Council_admits__technical_problem_/
 http://neilherron.blogspot.com/2008/09/ealing-council-and-its-unlawfully.html
 http://www.ealingtimes.co.uk/news/localnews/3652060.Council_refuses_to_correct_parking_bays/

A similar problem in Fleet, where following an appeal, the parking bays were ruled unlawful and unenforceable. The local council Hart has stated that it has no intention of refunding the money. They cannot refuse to repay the money as they cannot legally keep the money which has been 'unlawfully derived'.

 http://neilherron.blogspot.com/2008/06/bays-in-fleet-hampshire-are-ruled.html

In Lincoln, the council is having to pay out tens of thousands of pounds in compensation following a court case. The council had failed to paint the terminating yellow flash at the end of a double yellow line.

It can be argued that should not motorists be stung to drive them off the road? A valid argument, but this will only happen when we have a decent public transport system, and even more so better planning where our homes, workplace, leisure and shops are all easily accessible without the need to use a car.

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/11/385364.html
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/09/409275.html

Car parking restrictions should only be introduced to resolve a problem, that is a car parking problem or a traffic problem, but this is not what is happening. Since decriminalisation of car parking, it has become big business, a billion pound big businesses, and that is where the problem lies.

 http://neilherron.blogspot.com/2008/09/is-this-where-your-parking-fine-money.html

Protection of the environment, cleaning up our towns and cities, does not come into the equation.

website

 http://www.heureka.clara.net/surrey-hants/
 http://neilherron.blogspot.com/

reference

Peter Guest, Parking in North Camp Area of Farnborough, July 2008

Alex Hayes, Council admits 'technical problem', Ealing Times, 29 August 2008
 http://ealingtimes.co.uk/news/localnews/3632134.Council_admits__technical_problem_/

Colin Parker, Pay and dismay: 2.8m in illegal parking fees, Surrey Advertiser, 19 September 2008
 http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/2035568_legal_blunder_leads_to_free_parking_in_guildford

Keith Parkins, Curitiba Designing a sustainable city, April 2006
 http://www.heureka.clara.net/gaia/curitiba.htm

Keith Parkins, Weekend public transport, Indymedia UK, 8 November 2007
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/11/385364.html

Keith Parkins, North Camp traders suffer, Indymedia UK, 21 July 2008
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/07/404310.html?c=on

Keith Parkins, North Camp street parking, Indymedia UK, 28 July 2008
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/07/404836.html

Keith Parkins, The duty of local councils to consult, Indymedia UK, 1 August 2008
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/08/405173.html

Keith Parkins, Third World train service, Indymedia UK, 22 September 2008
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/09/409275.html