# Whitby again tro



## yorkslass (Aug 17, 2012)

hi i"ve just noticed some new signs that seem to say that a temporary order has been put in place to stop motorhomes parking between 11pm and 7am. i knew this was in the pipeline but wasn"t aware that they could initiate a temporary order. i also wondered how enforceable the signs are . they are printed on a4 sheets put inside see through wallets and fastended to a couple of lamposts with plastic cable ties, they hav"nt put them with existing signs. your thoughts appreciated.


----------



## baldybloke (Aug 17, 2012)

Hi, as far as I am aware a tro, if properly done is legally enforceable, to the extent that motors may be subject to confiscation under certain circumstances. unfortunate, but if Whitby doesn't want certain visitors they have a legal right (though IMO not a moral right) to place a TRO


----------



## jennyp19 (Aug 17, 2012)

Isn't it so stupid.  Do they think that campers will go to camp sites - I think not, they will just clear off to a much more welcoming place.


----------



## oldish hippy (Aug 17, 2012)

is this because whitby folk festival this weekend so town will be busier than normal


----------



## mikejay (Aug 17, 2012)

Just back from whitby but stayed on bluebank for a night did not see these signs but i wassant looking for them did notice that the whitby reggata is also on this weekend and lots of roads are going to be closed and no parking. noticed new sign at a poi wildcamping spot at robin hoods bay is now a no parking or stopping now.


----------



## John H (Aug 17, 2012)

oldish hippy said:


> is this because whitby folk festival this weekend so town will be busier than normal



I think you may be right. Temporary orders are often used for festivals/fairs/carnivals/farmers markets etc. - and provided that they are temporary then councils do not need to go through the rigorous procedure that is needed to establish a permanent TRO. But it is worth keeping an eye on to see if they disappear (as they should) after the festival.


----------



## Canalsman (Aug 17, 2012)

mikejay said:


> noticed new sign at a poi wildcamping spot at robin hoods bay is now a no parking or stopping now.



Thanks for the update ...


----------



## yorkslass (Aug 17, 2012)

John H said:


> I think you may be right. Temporary orders are often used for festivals/fairs/carnivals/farmers markets etc. - and provided that they are temporary then councils do not need to go through the rigorous procedure that is needed to establish a permanent TRO. But it is worth keeping an eye on to see if they disappear (as they should) after the festival.



this is not a temporary sign. now that i have stopped fuming i have written it down word for word. NYCC.temporary prohibition of waiting by motorcaravans between 11pm and 7am[north terrace whitby]order2012no194. road traffic regulation act1984 sec14[1] [as ammended].  NYCC has made an order which will prohibit the waiting of motorcaravans between the hours of 11pm and 7am each day from 13/8/2012_ 22/1/2014 on n terrace whitby in the borough of scarborough for environmental reasons to prevent occupants of motorcaravans depositing waste on the highway. the restrictions will be put into effect by notices and signs dated 10 /8.  the new order is between 11 and seven but the existing signs are between 11 and 6. the signs are so small you need glasses to read them. interestingly the temporary signs for the folk week and regatta are at least four times as big. as they stand would you think they are enforceable?


----------



## donkey too (Aug 17, 2012)

I wouldn't hve thought they were enforcable or even done by the council.

We are in the procss of having a restriction order on parking on Brandon market place and although the tro has been passed and signed and sealed. The council has stated that they are not enforcible until the proper signs can be made and installed. I should think the same law goes for any  part of the country.
why not ring your local councillor and ask wht it is ll about??


----------



## John H (Aug 18, 2012)

yorkslass said:


> this is not a temporary sign. now that i have stopped fuming i have written it down word for word. NYCC.temporary prohibition of waiting by motorcaravans between 11pm and 7am[north terrace whitby]order2012no194. road traffic regulation act1984 sec14[1] [as ammended].  NYCC has made an order which will prohibit the waiting of motorcaravans between the hours of 11pm and 7am each day from 13/8/2012_ 22/1/2014 on n terrace whitby in the borough of scarborough for environmental reasons to prevent occupants of motorcaravans depositing waste on the highway. the restrictions will be put into effect by notices and signs dated 10 /8.  the new order is between 11 and seven but the existing signs are between 11 and 6. the signs are so small you need glasses to read them. interestingly the temporary signs for the folk week and regatta are at least four times as big. as they stand would you think they are enforceable?



Ah, I see now; the "temporary" bit refers to the period from 13/8/12 to 22/1/14 - this is clearly intended to be an experimental period. As to whether or not it is enforceable, that depends on the procedure they went through to establish it. From the wording you quote it looks as if they have - but to be sure you would need to ask the local council to show you a full copy of the order (and the minutes of the meetings, public consultation etc).


----------



## oldish hippy (Aug 18, 2012)

John H said:


> Ah, I see now; the "temporary" bit refers to the period from 13/8/12 to 22/1/14 - this is clearly intended to be an experimental period. As to whether or not it is enforceable, that depends on the procedure they went through to establish it. From the wording you quote it looks as if they have - but to be sure you would need to ask the local council to show you a full copy of the order (and the minutes of the meetings, public consultation etc).



think that duration of whitby folk festival please dont quote me on that


----------



## iceman1956 (Aug 18, 2012)

Scratch Whitby of my visit list. Flamborough Head and Bempton are much nicer anyway


----------



## yorkslass (Aug 18, 2012)

John H said:


> Ah, I see now; the "temporary" bit refers to the period from 13/8/12 to 22/1/14 - this is clearly intended to be an experimental period. As to whether or not it is enforceable, that depends on the procedure they went through to establish it. From the wording you quote it looks as if they have - but to be sure you would need to ask the local council to show you a full copy of the order (and the minutes of the meetings, public consultation etc).



hi what i was concerned about was if it could be enforced without putting up permanent signs. as i mentioned before they are on pieces of a4 paper inside plastic see through wallets and fastened with cable ties. the temporary signs for the regatta are four times the size and clearly displayed.


----------



## John H (Aug 18, 2012)

yorkslass said:


> hi what i was concerned about was if it could be enforced without putting up permanent signs. as i mentioned before they are on pieces of a4 paper inside plastic see through wallets and fastened with cable ties. the temporary signs for the regatta are four times the size and clearly displayed.



All road signs must either be prescribed under the Road Traffic Regulation Act of 1984 or, in the case of non-prescribed signs, be individually authorised by the Secretary of State. So, without actually seeing the signs and without contacting the council to see whether their signs have been authorised, I'm afraid this cannot be answered. Having said that, I would suspect that A4 paper inside plastic wallets probably doesn't qualify!


----------



## iceman1956 (Aug 18, 2012)

*Whitby TRO*

This may answer a few questions, found this on the Whitby Gazette site


Published on Thursday 28 June 2012 12:54

A PARKING area which allows the overnight camping of motorhomes is being designated in Whitby for a one year trial.

If there are no objections the scheme could start next week and see motorhomes and campers being legally allowed to park up overnight at the Marina Back car park for a charge of £10 per night.

Scarborough Borough Council (SBC) has admitted that the current controls and legislations are ineffective and the new suggestion comes from a review group set up specifically to deal with the council’s car parking operations.

A report with the recommendation of a specific site for motorhomes was discussed at a meeting yesterday but the final decision will rest with a senior council officer.

If there are no objections to the proposals they will be implemented from Wednesday.

Motorhomes will be charged the £10 fee to park at the car park, towards the rear of the Co-op, between the hours of 11pm and 7am.

Between those same times motorhomes will also be banned from parking at the following car parks - Pavilion top and drive, West Cliff, Church Street, Endeavour Wharf and Marina front.

The move follows restrictions which, recently confirmed by North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC), which limits motor homes and campers from parking on selected streets in and around Whitby such as Sandsend Beach front, North Promenade, east terrace, Royal Crescent and Church Street.

New signs outlining the amended Traffic Regulation Order have been ordered after SBC admitted that the previous rules were ineffective.

It said: “The difficulty with enforcement is proving that the motor caravan is occupied overnight, this coupled with lack of signage results in the current restrictions being ineffective.”

Similar procedures are set to be put in place in Scarborough and Filey.

SBC added the parking review group has discussed motor caravan parking at length over the past three years and have been joined in their concern about the level of this activity by local traders and residents but had also had correspondence from owners of motorhomes who want dedicated provision without constraints.


----------



## John H (Aug 18, 2012)

iceman1956 said:


> This may answer a few questions, found this on the Whitby Gazette site
> 
> 
> Published on Thursday 28 June 2012 12:54
> ...



It therefore looks as if the A4 paper signs have been put up while the new signs are being ordered. In effect, that probably means there is no legal signage at present and enforcement can only happen after the new signs arrive. If I am right in this, then the council will know they can't enforce until the new signs arrive but are hoping people will be put off by the deterrent effect of the paper signs.


----------



## kimbowbill (Aug 18, 2012)

I am due to go to Robin Hood's bay 7th September, i saw on a earlier post that MH's are banned from the top car park, can anyone confirm this? its causing me a great deal of stress, just the thought of going on a campsite, i'm happy to pay the £10 on this occassion  as my family are staying in a cottage and i want to spend time with them,


----------



## iceman1956 (Aug 18, 2012)

John H said:


> It therefore looks as if the A4 paper signs have been put up while the new signs are being ordered. In effect, that probably means there is no legal signage at present and enforcement can only happen after the new signs arrive. If I am right in this, then the council will know they can't enforce until the new signs arrive but are hoping people will be put off by the deterrent effect of the paper signs.



Just looked at the councils details for the Marina Back Car Park, vehicles over 1.5 tons should use the designated coach bays, cost to park is a single charge of £15 for 24 hours, so surely if we have paid for 24 hours we can stay overnight at no extra charge ??? Or do they mean they are going to put an extra charge for parking between 11pm & 7am. 

They do contradict themselves though, as it states no overnight Sleeping or camping and also parking charges are from 9am to 6pm. 

No wonder we get confused as to whether we are parking legally or not !!!!

http://http://www.scarborough.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=15758


----------



## baldybloke (Aug 18, 2012)

As usual, ill thought out solution from a council, this is what happens when people who do not understand something take advice from "experts" who for the most part know even less, but bluster their way through, generally so full of their own importance, fearfull for theior well paid positions and a hatred or incapability of admitting when they might be wrong, and that others who understand a situation might know better on a given subject.


----------



## John H (Aug 18, 2012)

iceman1956 said:


> Just looked at the councils details for the Marina Back Car Park, vehicles over 1.5 tons should use the designated coach bays, cost to park is a single charge of £15 for 24 hours, so surely if we have paid for 24 hours we can stay overnight at no extra charge ??? Or do they mean they are going to put an extra charge for parking between 11pm & 7am.
> 
> They do contradict themselves though, as it states no overnight Sleeping or camping and also parking charges are from 9am to 6pm.
> 
> ...



Hi

There is a world of difference between something that has been done within the law and something that has been done logically! :wacko::lol-053:


----------



## yorkslass (Aug 18, 2012)

kimbowbill said:


> I am due to go to Robin Hood's bay 7th September, i saw on a earlier post that MH's are banned from the top car park, can anyone confirm this? its causing me a great deal of stress, just the thought of going on a campsite, i'm happy to pay the £10 on this occassion  as my family are staying in a cottage and i want to spend time with them,



hi will try and find out for you. itlooks as though no where else has these temporary signs at the moment, as john h has said they have probably been put there to deter given that the regatta and folk week are on at the same time.


----------



## silverfox uk (Sep 5, 2012)

*Silverfox uk*

hi all just thought you might want to know parked in Pavilion top car park Whitby 30th August to fish the pier with my grandson 14yrs old and brother in law 69yrs and I am 65. high tide at 3:30am. Returned at 7:30am to find penalty charge notice attached to the windscreen. The printed notice states contravention code 95 *parked in a parking place for a purpose other than the designated purpose of the parking place*. £50.00 penalty charge or £25.00 if paid within fourteen days, the notice was left at 6:06am, by who ?. Parked in the same spot three times this year again to fish the pier at night and had no problem, each time cars were parked all night next to us possibly from local hotels and guest houses, but we noticed this time the car park was empty apart from us. Notices have been posted, typed letters held on with plastic ties, and hard to read. With no parking any were near the harbor or pier at night we will not be able to carry on fishing, Scarborough council must be aware that most of us do not have a second vehicle we travel everywhere in our motor home, just because we are parked we are not camping. Any comments would be appreciated.
( Dave from Stokesley )http://www.wildcamping.co.uk/forums/images/smilies/mad1.gif


----------



## bigjimdsmith (Sep 5, 2012)

*Challenge it*

Challenge it as you clearly were not contravening anything !!:dance:


----------



## groyne (Sep 5, 2012)

> hi all just thought you might want to know parked in Pavilion top car park Whitby 30th August to fish the pier with my grandson 14yrs old and brother in law 69yrs and I am 65. high tide at 3:30am. Returned at 7:30am to find penalty charge notice attached to the windscreen. The printed notice states contravention code 95 parked in a parking place for a purpose other than the designated purpose of the parking place. £50.00 penalty charge or £25.00 if paid within fourteen days, the notice was left at 6:06am, by who ?. Parked in the same spot three times this year again to fish the pier at night and had no problem, each time cars were parked all night next to us possibly from local hotels and guest houses, but we noticed this time the car park was empty apart from us. Notices have been posted, typed letters held on with plastic ties, and hard to read. With no parking any were near the harbor or pier at night we will not be able to carry on fishing, Scarborough council must be aware that most of us do not have a second vehicle we travel everywhere in our motor home, just because we are parked we are not camping. Any comments would be appreciated.




Most disturbing, as I regularly fish Whity West at night in the winter and this year I've only got my van for transport. Obviously, as the previous poster said, challenge it.



What I find most infuriating about this order, is the pretext it has been made under:



> for environmental reasons to prevent occupants of motorcaravans depositing waste on the highway.



If this is a regular occurance;

how many Motorhomers have they prosecuted?

If they haven't prosecuted anybody, how do they know that it's motorhome owners that are breaking the law?

What evidence do they have for waste being deposited on the road between 11pm and 7am?

I'm sure that there's an endless list of similar questions, and if they can't be answered then SBC are discriminating against law abiding Motorhome owners.


----------



## baldybloke (Sep 5, 2012)

Discriminating against motorhomes? surely not?, the fine and upstanding sbc members would not discriminate, they would be happy to fleece anybody!


----------



## Smaug (Sep 5, 2012)

I may be wrong but others on here have said that the relevant notices MUST conform to a specific standard as defind by the Highways agency(?) Well worth a check thro the other threads as there were links to the relevant official documents.


----------



## glenalmond (Sep 5, 2012)

*Whitby TRO*

As they have made it quite clear why the TRO has been imposed I would say that it is enforcable so if you ignore it Beware, such a shame as Whitby is such a sweet place.


----------



## maureenandtom (Sep 5, 2012)

silverfox uk said:


> hi all just thought you might want to know parked in Pavilion top car park Whitby 30th August to fish the pier with my grandson 14yrs old and brother in law 69yrs and I am 65. high tide at 3:30am. Returned at 7:30am to find penalty charge notice attached to the windscreen. The printed notice states contravention code 95 *parked in a parking place for a purpose other than the designated purpose of the parking place*. £50.00 penalty charge or £25.00 if paid within fourteen days, the notice was left at 6:06am, by who ?. Parked in the same spot three times this year again to fish the pier at night and had no problem, each time cars were parked all night next to us possibly from local hotels and guest houses, but we noticed this time the car park was empty apart from us. Notices have been posted, typed letters held on with plastic ties, and hard to read. With no parking any were near the harbor or pier at night we will not be able to carry on fishing, Scarborough council must be aware that most of us do not have a second vehicle we travel everywhere in our motor home, just because we are parked we are not camping. Any comments would be appreciated.
> ( Dave from Stokesley )http://www.wildcamping.co.uk/forums/images/smilies/mad1.gif




*Dispute it. Challenge it.   Use the appeals process. Begin a war.*  It's a risk - but are you in the right?   I believe that the PCN is suspended while a dispute is going on so if it starts to look bad for you, you can always back down. But, personally, I think you can get your own way on this.

You think whoever placed the PCN is able to prove you were *parked in a parking place for a purpose other than the designated purpose of  the parking place*?  It's a parking place;  you were parking.

I'd write to the parking management that I was in no way contravening code 95 and if they have proof then I'd like to see it and I'd also tell them that if they do not provide that proof I will explain to the court that I had asked to see it and they had failed to produce it.   If they have not provided it then I will ask the court to doubt that proof exists.   If they can't provide it to you then they can't provide it to a court.

A letter something like this - but perhaps one of our resident law experts could provide a better draft.

_Dear Sir,

PCN number ......     I dispute this PCN;  I am not guilty of contravening Code 95 and I doubt that you can prove that I am guilty.  If you can provide proof then please do so that I may provide an argument against it.

Be aware that I am ready for my day in court and if you have not provided the proof I have asked for then I will tell the court that you have failed to produce it and I will ask the court to doubt that proof exists.  

I am confident that the court will not find me guilty.

Yours

********_


I successfully disputed a similar PCN in North Devon some while ago.  My contravention was _*"cooking, camping, sleeping"*_.  My appeal (I believe) resulted in the contravention being withdrawn and notice boards being amended to not include that contravention code.   The offence of _cooking, camping, sleeping_ in North Devon no longer exists.  I injected more outrage into my own letters to the council.  They wriggled a bit - tried telling me that I should pay the reduced charge by paying now because if the appeal was unsuccessful then I'd have to pay the higher charge.  I responded by asking why on earth I would give them an interest free loan and asked them what the court would think of their request.  I never allowed them to think for one moment that I wouldn't see them in court.  I thought the risk was worth it.  Many do not.   I always believed I would win.

I wrote up my own experience here - http://www.wildcamping.co.uk/forums/wild-camping-motorhome-chat/11681-long-mysterious-tale.html

Mostly, the penalties are straightforward and can be proved.  A photograph will show you parked outside white lines or displaying an expired ticket or no ticket or setting up a market stall  or whatever.  Your, and my, offence is quite different.  I doubt that there can be proof of such an airy fairy offence as code 95 and proof is quite different from opinion.  Can your pocket be picked because of a council employee's opinion?


----------



## Smaug (Sep 5, 2012)

Just a thought, were there any others fishing & do you know them? An independant witness on your behalf could be very persuasive if it came to court. Even a dated photo taken late at night might provide supportive evidence. But as stated, how can they possibly prove that the van wasn't simply parked & empty?


----------



## yorkslass (Sep 7, 2012)

:mad1:dont know how long the have been up but new signs have appeared on west cliff "no stopping of motorcaravans between 11pm and 7am". i only wish i had the money to challenge them cos in my opinion thats discrimination and i would love to know how that affects our human rights. iwould also like to know if they are enforceable as there is no reference under which act it has been made, or does the blanket "no stopping" overide the need to do that.


----------



## John H (Sep 7, 2012)

Silverfox UK - you have definitely been unlucky and the following may be of use to you.
Discrimination is legal in certain circumstances - but only if the proper processes have been followed. Height barriers are discriminatory, weight limits are discriminatory and bus lanes are discriminatory, so I would be careful of going down that route. The best approach would be to check to see if there is a TRO and precisely what it says but if they are claiming that you were doing something other than parking then they would need to both provide evidence of that and show that whatever it is they had evidence of you doing was contrary to the TRO (if it indeed exists). From what Yorklass has just posted it may be that they have realised the "offence" you have been charged with is a nonsense and the wording is now more precise. But do those new notices conform with a TRO? Where they there when you parked? All in all, your PCN is definitely worth challenging.


----------



## yorkslass (Sep 8, 2012)

John H said:


> Silverfox UK - you have definitely been unlucky and the following may be of use to you.
> Discrimination is legal in certain circumstances - but only if the proper processes have been followed. Height barriers are discriminatory, weight limits are discriminatory and bus lanes are discriminatory, so I would be careful of going down that route. The best approach would be to check to see if there is a TRO and precisely what it says but if they are claiming that you were doing something other than parking then they would need to both provide evidence of that and show that whatever it is they had evidence of you doing was contrary to the TRO (if it indeed exists). From what Yorklass has just posted it may be that they have realised the "offence" you have been charged with is a nonsense and the wording is now more precise. But do those new notices conform with a TRO? Where they there when you parked? All in all, your PCN is definitely worth challenging.



do they need a TRO to put up the no stopping signs as opposed to needing to get one to support the no camping or sleeping signs they had formerly?


----------



## Tommybago (Sep 9, 2012)

Can anyone clarify if the charge and designated area at marina Back has gone ahead? I have to admit I could live with the charge for a bit of peace at the moment, we are in our first season and are just back in ireland after 3 weeks in Devon and Cornwall and I found it stressfull with all the no overnight, no camping, no sleeping etc, it actually drove us to a couple of sites out of neccesity, I think if I could of paid a tenner for a nights peace I would have done on several occasions, just my thoughts, as a newbie i stand to be shot down! I will get round to telling the story of a few good places soon - promise!


----------



## djdf1 (Sep 9, 2012)

*whitby*

hi we stayed in a sea front hotel in whitby right opposite pavillion and on every other lampost was a a4 sign saying no overnight sleeping in any vehicle between i think 1100 pm and 800 am but campers were parked further up the promenade after the beach lift that was2/3/4 this month


----------



## iceman1956 (Sep 9, 2012)

Tommybago said:


> Can anyone clarify if the charge and designated area at marina Back has gone ahead? I have to admit I could live with the charge for a bit of peace at the moment, we are in our first season and are just back in ireland after 3 weeks in Devon and Cornwall and I found it stressfull with all the no overnight, no camping, no sleeping etc, it actually drove us to a couple of sites out of neccesity, I think if I could of paid a tenner for a nights peace I would have done on several occasions, just my thoughts, as a newbie i stand to be shot down! I will get round to telling the story of a few good places soon - promise!



The council have proceeded with the parking TRO but have squashed the proposed changes to the Back Marina car park, they are not putting through the changes that would allow camping/overnight sleeping in Campers & Motorhomes


----------



## mariesnowgoose (Sep 10, 2012)

iceman1956 said:


> The council have proceeded with the parking TRO but have squashed the proposed changes to the Back Marina car park, they are not putting through the changes that would allow camping/overnight sleeping in Campers & Motorhomes



Providing a car park for campers (an "aire" with/without facilities?) would certainly suit wild campers and solve some of their other parking problems.

Whitby, if memory serves me right, is a very busy little town with lots of tourists and I'm assuming (there I go with that dangerous word again) that parking is often at a premium.
Motorhomes and campers are easy targets in this situation. It very much depends on your local councillors. Therein lies the massive flaw as you have to bang your head on a brick wall for a very long time if you want any changes made. Depends how many "little hitlers" are serving on the council. 

Maybe they voted against a car park facility for campers because of a fear they may be descended upon by gypsies? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the "rumours" in Northumberland about parking restrictions for overnight camping there seem to suggest this as an "argument". Whether it is actually true or not I couldn't say as I'm not in possession of the facts.

The council have obviously at least considered the possibility of providing parking facilities for motorhomes if the comments on this thread are correct, so someone somewhere has started to think about this and proposed it. Maybe whoever suggested it just needs some extra help and backing from motorhomers so they can go back to the drawing board and propose it again with the proper facts and arguments in place?

They've taken the easy option of TROs (does this stand for Traffic Regulation Order? - I hate bloody acronyms!) instead of going down the route of finding a proper solution to campervan parking.
You need to find out why this didn't happen. Was it monetary? Fear of gypsies? Down to some ignorant/prejudiced councillors? Other practical problems? Who were the objectors and what were their reasons? What do the local businesses in Whitby think about campervans and do they understand their input to the local economy?

If I lived in or near Whitby or was a regular visitor, I would consider having a go at getting to the bottom of this and seeing if the situation could be turned around in a positive way.

If anybody thinks it's worthwhile the local council should be approached,  their fears/objections either allayed or squashed, and they should be  challenged along the lines of Bigteepee's campaign.

http://www.wildcamping.co.uk/forums...aires-urgent-help-needed-meeting-council.html


----------



## maingate (Sep 10, 2012)

I think that Whitby made changes because of the motorhomers who parked up and did not move for a week or more. As long as they got a cheap holiday by the beach, they did not care about anyone else.

The Co-op car park seemed to be used by overnighters (from what I saw) not holidaymakers in motorhomes.


----------



## frontslide (Sep 10, 2012)

Have we ascertained whether we can overnight on station car park in Robin Hoods Bay?


----------



## maureenandtom (Sep 10, 2012)

mariesnowgoose said:


> Providing a car park for campers (an "aire" with/without facilities?) would certainly suit wild campers and solve some of their other parking problems.
> 
> Whitby, if memory serves me right, is a very busy little town with lots of tourists and I'm assuming (there I go with that dangerous word again) that parking is often at a premium.
> Motorhomes and campers are easy targets in this situation. It very much depends on your local councillors. Therein lies the massive flaw as you have to bang your head on a brick wall for a very long time if you want any changes made. Depends how many "little hitlers" are serving on the council.
> ...



I could cry.   

There are a number of threads about Scarborough.   People's interest began when there were a few complaints in the local press about Campervans  camping where they will.    The council began to do something about it and a few motorhomers (me among them) put our point of view to the council.   

If you read the threads, you'll cry too.  Search for "Scarborough" and then take your pick, in fact read as many as you can, and http://www.wildcamping.co.uk/forums...-chat/13727-scarborough-traders-complain.html is a good enough place to start.

The council committee concerned (called the Traffic Review Group), with the help of one or two motorhomers, eventually  came up with the idea of providing dedicated parking spaces in three car parks.   They wanted to charge £10 for the parking with no other services to be provided for a trial period of one year.

An Aire, yes?   Three of them.   But, do you think this makes people happy?   No, it doesn't.    http://www.wildcamping.co.uk/forums...6-sometimes-were-our-own-worst-enemies-2.html might give a hint of why it doesn't.  But any of the threads might give you a little more insight.

It didn't makes all of us happy because . . . 

Some of us hate Scarborough (Benefits on Sea, Scabbyborough, Scarbados, etc), or  we don't like the proposed charge, or the council are ripping us off,  or the locals don't like us or . . .whatever . . . 

The upshot was that the proposals were held, by a separate part of the council, to be not in accordance with planning policy for the borough.   But if they'd read some of the comments on here about their proposed Aires then I'm not surprised they withdrew them, planning policy or not.

I'm sure this makes some of us here very happy. 

It could make me cry.


----------



## Canalsman (Sep 10, 2012)

frontslide said:


> Have we ascertained whether we can overnight on station car park in Robin Hoods Bay?



Sadly not ... see here:

Station - Robin Hood's Bay | Scarborough Borough Council


----------



## kimbowbill (Sep 10, 2012)

frontslide said:


> Have we ascertained whether we can overnight on station car park in Robin Hoods Bay?



I have just stayed 2 nights with no bother, there are no signs at all saying no overnight, as yet anyway, this may change under the new proposals but as at the 6 & 7th Sept i was ok and were 3 other vans, i paid £5 to park overnight


----------



## runnach (Sep 10, 2012)

maureenandtom said:


> I could cry.
> 
> There are a number of threads about Scarborough.   People's interest began when there were a few complaints in the local press about Campervans  camping where they will.    The council began to do something about it and a few motorhomers (me among them) put our point of view to the council.
> 
> ...


----------



## maureenandtom (Sep 10, 2012)

channa said:


> [Q
> 
> The problem is, we create the problem.
> 
> ...




I don't agree. Oh, I do agree with most of what you say but not about keeping quiet.   I will admit, though. that you may be right, that there's a time for keeping quiet - but you're not right about Scarborough.  There the situation wasn't brought about by motorhomers not keeping quiet;  not alerting the radar;  it was brought about by Scarborough residents and, allegedly, Scarborough businesses, complaining.   Things were happening anyway with or without any input from motorhomers.

The on street parking restrictions are the responsibility of North Yorks District Council and the on street restrictions there are being brought in by them.   So far as I know, no motorhomer approached North Yorks Council.   It was in response to NYDC's decisions that Scarborough Borough Council (responsible for off street parking, ie car parks) brought in the proposed trial of Aires but, I hope, also in response to my, and others, suggestions for the provision of an Aire type facility.

And ... the council agreed and voted for a one year trial of three Aires (let's call them Aires for want of saying "dedicated motorhome parking places" all the time). 

It was no input from motorhomers that destroyed the trial.  The council has been quoted here that their proposals for an Aire were overruled by planning policy.

But there you are *mariesnowgoose*, Channa isn't alone in thinking we should just keep quiet:  " *If anybody thinks it's worthwhile the local council should be approached,  their fears/objections either allayed or squashed, and they should be  challenged along the lines of Bigteepee's campaign."* 

I'd love to see somebody doing just that.  It won't be me.  Or, if it is, I won't be telling any motorhomers about it.  How about you doing it?   I can provide you with names and email addresses of the people to talk to.   There's plenty of talkers here - not many doers.   You could be a doer.




mariesnowgoose said:


> Providing a car park for campers (an "aire" with/without facilities?) would certainly suit wild campers and solve some of their other parking problems.
> 
> Whitby, if memory serves me right, is a very busy little town with lots of tourists and I'm assuming (there I go with that dangerous word again) that parking is often at a premium.
> Motorhomes and campers are easy targets in this situation. It very much depends on your local councillors. Therein lies the massive flaw as you have to bang your head on a brick wall for a very long time if you want any changes made. Depends how many "little hitlers" are serving on the council.
> ...


----------



## Robmac (Sep 10, 2012)

I have emailed 2 of the councillors. One replied sympathetically, but with no answers. The other one didn't reply at all!


----------



## runnach (Sep 11, 2012)

maureenandtom said:


> I don't agree. Oh, I do agree with most of what you say but not about keeping quiet.   I will admit, though. that you may be right, that there's a time for keeping quiet - but you're not right about Scarborough.  There the situation wasn't brought about by motorhomers not keeping quiet;  not alerting the radar;  it was brought about by Scarborough residents and, allegedly, Scarborough businesses, complaining.   Things were happening anyway with or without any input from motorhomers.
> 
> The on street parking restrictions are the responsibility of North Yorks District Council and the on street restrictions there are being brought in by them.   So far as I know, no motorhomer approached North Yorks Council.   It was in response to NYDC's decisions that Scarborough Borough Council (responsible for off street parking, ie car parks) brought in the proposed trial of Aires but, I hope, also in response to my, and others, suggestions for the provision of an Aire type facility.
> 
> ...



Firstly, my address is Scarborough, and latterly filey, and yes I do take an interest in local politics.

I am and continue to be disappointed with the attitude of the council whilst having empathy for those residents  who are subjected to inappropriate behaviour of motorhomers. Whitby really shouldn't come as a surprise.

I. Echo my original point in that the councils see a solution to a situation it seems beyond their grasp to encourage tourism to an area heavily dependant upon tourism furthermore with a short season and a climate not exactly mirroring the south of France.

Tourist prevention officers it seems

I know umpteen places to stop a night in this area , however irresponsible behaviour has raised the sheckles.

The proposed trial of Aires , would induce a lot of tros in lots of locations narrowing down something called choice
The same choice that we choose motorhomes to enjoy our recreation

Antagonising doesn't help.

Having recently wilded in Scotland not forgetting I full time so wilding is close to my heart, how long will it be before the hiighland council introduce trod that are enforceable? Why? Because someone had to spout that the nop signs were unenfoceable with no legal standing.

 To be frank and contoversial if people are that reliant on being spoonfed info they should join the big clubs
I know because I have taken the time and trouble to work out the ' threatening' signs with no substance, why on earth would I be motivated to point out to authority their errors?

The whole aire thing here is flawed in the context that local authorities see a perceived problem and solution.

There is a total lack of understanding indeed an inability to  consider any benefits......I assure you totally different to France
Channa


----------



## Robmac (Sep 11, 2012)

It is almost enough to send me back to boating, where you can wildcamp pretty much where you please!


----------



## mariesnowgoose (Sep 11, 2012)

I have been an active "do-er" in the past and my time is too precious to get involved in the antics in and around Scarborough and Whitby. What I was trying to say is that if someone feels so strongly about it there are rational and logical ways of trying to change things if they have the energy and nouse to do so. 

It's fine to have a whinge (us Brits are good at it) but doing something to make a difference is a different kettle of fish, and not many people are prepared to go down that route.

I like to keep my head down when wildcamping, like many on here. The further away from other people the happier I am. Social "meets" are in a different category, and I enjoy those too for different reasons. If Scarborough or Whitby are no-go areas I shall just pass them by. The more popular any activity becomes the more followers and detractors/objectors you will get accordingly. 

Catch 22.


----------



## frontslide (Sep 11, 2012)

Canalsman said:


> Sadly not ... see here:
> 
> Station - Robin Hood's Bay | Scarborough Borough Council



Looks like the Fylingdales inn then.


----------



## kimbowbill (Sep 11, 2012)

frontslide said:


> Looks like the Fylingdales inn then.



No, that's a no go as well, doesn't anyone read my posts, i have said i had no trouble parking in the station car park, jeez, i don't know why i bother sometimes

posted here but no body seems to read it

http://www.wildcamping.co.uk/forums...obin-hoods-bay.html?highlight=robin+hoods+bay

i won't bother anymore, i will find things out and keep them to myself, pfft


----------



## runnach (Sep 11, 2012)

kimbowbill said:


> No, that's a no go as well, doesn't anyone read my posts, i have said i had no trouble parking in the station car park, jeez, i don't know why i bother sometimes
> 
> posted here but no body seems to read it
> 
> ...



Nope folk are too busy ruffling their feathers to read properly.

I full time as you know, for four years now and have had no problems, however it seems the weekend warriors I.e the greys of wherever are hell bent on challenging councils etc ....when keeping gob shut and a bit of knowledge is a. Better option.

Mine is a way of life not recreation and yes it piths me off
Channa


----------



## Robmac (Sep 11, 2012)

channa said:


> Nope folk are too busy ruffling their feathers to read properly.
> 
> I full time as you know, for four years now and have had no problems, however it seems the weekend warriors I.e the greys of wherever are hell bent on challenging councils etc ....when keeping gob shut and a bit of knowledge is a. Better option.
> 
> ...



I don't really understand this argument. Not having a go, I really am just seeking clarification. As I understand it, it is getting harder and harder to take a MH to Scarborough or Whitby. In which case is it not a good idea to challenge this. Personally I would not go to either if you paid me, but I would join in on a challenge to this policy (and have) as it seems to be becoming more and more widespread and therefore will affect places I would visit.


----------



## Robmac (Sep 11, 2012)

Exactly so do we just sit back and say nothing!


----------



## Robmac (Sep 11, 2012)

basildog said:


> And some fell on stoney ground !



Doesn't really answer the question, but thanks anyway.


----------



## yorkslass (Sep 13, 2012)

Robmac said:


> Doesn't really answer the question, but thanks anyway.



a yorkshire saying thats always served me well. see all, hear all, say nowt. sometimes its best to keep your head down.


----------

