Whitby again tro

[yorkslass]

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]

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]

Challenge it

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

 

[groyne]

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]

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

 

[Smaug]

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]

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]

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]

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]

: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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

 

[maureenandtom]

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

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]

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