Private roads

mar_k

Rolf F wrote:

diy wrote:

The public normally have a right to pass over a road highway no matter who is responsible for its maintenance. Publicly maintained and privately maintained roads are normally part of the highway. All roads which the public can access are subject to the various road traffic act statutes. You do not have a right to restrict a right of way, just because you own the land. ROW are not influenced by who is responsible for the maintenance of the road, they are separate. Rights of way have been established over land owned by others for 100s of years. There are rights dating back around 100 years which give the public access over other peoples land.

A private dwelling is something entirely different. A shared drive way is different again. It seems daft to compare them to a private road.

Mar-k was not specifically talking about rights of way. He simply said that unless the road had a locked gate he would use it. Obviously, nobody is suggesting you shouldn't use public rights of way. However, Mar-k was implying that he regarded anything without a lock on it as a public right of way. If he didn't mean that, he shouldn't have said it.

Perhaps I should have explained in more detail what I meant so I will try as best I can now to clear it up.

I am not talking about entering someones garden, I am not talking about going onto private land and Im not talking about borrowing someones unlocked belongings.
I am not talking about entering some ones private drive

I am saying that if there is a road which says 'private road' and there is an open gate or a gate that is unlocked, then there is nothing to stop me or anyone else using it.
There is nothing wrong with using the road imo!
surely if you wasn't meant to be in there is would be locked or have a sign saying 'private property'
I use many 'private roads' in islington where I live. It means nothing. Im not trespassing, Im not causing criminal damage, Im not doing anything wrong and I stand by my original post.
If there isnt a gate or the gate is open then carry on and use the road.

mar_k

Rolf F wrote:

Mar-k was not specifically talking about rights of way. He simply said that unless the road had a locked gate he would use it. Obviously, nobody is suggesting you shouldn't use public rights of way. However, Mar-k was implying that he regarded anything without a lock on it as a public right of way. If he didn't mean that, he shouldn't have said it.

With all due respect, How do you know what I was implying?
I wasn't talking about any other situation apart from the one the OP had posted about.
No where have I said anything without a lock on it, is a public right of way.

Perhaps I should have been a little more clear on what I meant but you can just assume I was implying everything without a lock is ok to use.

If it had a sign saying 'private property keep out' then I would no doubt respect that.
a sign saying 'private road' means nothing at all to me. There are many 'Private roads' around my way.
Nothing to stop me or anyone else using them though.

rolf_f

mar_k wrote:

With all due respect, How do you know what I was implying?

Errmm, by the words you use? That's sort of what implying means. If you don't want people interpreting your posts then spend the time making your point properly in the first place. Why say 'if it hasn't got a lock on it, it's ok to use' when your opinion is that it isn't that simplistic (as you imply in your later posts).

mar_k

I can only appologise for not wording my original post in a way that everyone would understand.
I naturaly thought that since I posted a reply to the question the OP had asked, my reply would be taken as just that and not a generalisation on ALL things without a lock.

batch78

Scrumple wrote:

I had a cup of tea, this morning.

I sincerely hope it was explicitly deemed to be in your personal and exclusive use mug.

rick_chasey

There's a private road in Cambridge just off Purbeck road, which is down the side of the 6th form.

Purbeck road is pretty narrow > just fits two cars, and is very busy since it's the place where you pick up/drop off when you drive.

Now, this private road is a perfect place to do a 3point turn - saves you going down the whole road, over some brutal speed bumps, and all the way back again. The residents have a "private road, no turning" sign.

Naturally, given my Larry David streak, I ignored the sign. Am I in the wrong from a highway code/legal perspective or not?

bails87

Rick Chasey wrote:

There's a private road in Cambridge just off Purbeck road, which is down the side of the 6th form.

Purbeck road is pretty narrow > just fits two cars, and is very busy since it's the place where you pick up/drop off when you drive.

Now, this private road is a perfect place to do a 3point turn - saves you going down the whole road, over some brutal speed bumps, and all the way back again. The residents have a "private road, no turning" sign.

Naturally, given my Larry David streak, I ignored the sign. Am I in the wrong from a highway code/legal perspective or not?

So if I put a sign on my wife saying "Do not beat" you'd start hitting her?! Disgraceful behaviour, and remember, that's not me inferring something, that's you implying it!

rake

get a pick axe and start digging the road up and see if she comes out. :idea:

diy

Rick Chasey wrote:

Am I in the wrong from a highway code/legal perspective or not?

No/unlikely

MattC59

diy wrote:

The public normally have a right to pass over a road highway no matter who is responsible for its maintenance. Publicly maintained and privately maintained roads are normally part of the highway. All roads which the public can access are subject to the various road traffic act statutes. You do not have a right to restrict a right of way, just because you own the land. ROW are not influenced by who is responsible for the maintenance of the road, they are separate. Rights of way have been established over land owned by others for 100s of years. There are rights dating back around 100 years which give the public access over other peoples land.

Horse sh*t !!!

You are confusing a road or highway with a private road. A private road is not normally part of the highway, unless it has been adopted by the local council and highways authority, in which case it will also be maintained by the highways authority.
All roads which the public can access are NOT subject to the various road traffic act statuates, for the simple reason that unless they are designated a public right of way, then they are PRIVATE land. The ability to access a private road does not give any right of way, or make it subject to said statuates.
You mention that you don't have a right to restrict a right of way just because you own the land. Correct. But a private road does not necessarily mean that there is any right of way, other than to the owners of the properties / land which it accesses.

MattC59

diy wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Am I in the wrong from a highway code/legal perspective or not?

No/unlikely

Not even 'unlikely', not at all is a better answer. However, if the residents (assuming that they also own a share of the road as part of their deeds) decided to take civil action, then you could be done for trespass. (If the court could be ar*ed !! )

MattC59

What I don't understand about this thread is why people have an issue with private property ?
Just because it might make your life easier doesn't mean you can use said private property.
It's a private road, the clue is in the name............

diy

MattC59 wrote:

You are confusing a road or highway with a private road. A private road is not normally part of the highway, unless it has been adopted by the local council and highways authority, in which case it will also be maintained by the highways authority.

You are confusing the term highway with the responsibilities of the highway authority

The term "highway" is not defined in statute. The common law definition of a highway is a route, which all persons can use to pass and re-pass along as often and whenever they wish without hindrance. There is no link to the term highway and the responsibilities of the highways authority. Whether a road is maintainable at public expense or not is irrelevant to whether it is a highway or not. Private streets are often referred to as unadopted highways.

MattC59 wrote:

All roads which the public can access are NOT subject to the various road traffic act statutes, for the simple reason that unless they are designated a public right of way, then they are PRIVATE land. The ability to access a private road does not give any right of way, or make it subject to said statutes.

I forgot that on bikeradar, putting things in capitals makes them fact. However, you should do some research before claiming something is wrong otherwise you will look silly

The term 'road' is defined in section 142 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 as any length of highway or other road to which the public has access and includes bridges over which a road passes. There is precedent (Oxford v Austin [1981]) that a road is definable right of way between two points.

The expression 'on a road or other public place' is employed frequently in Road Traffic legislation, for example sections 1-6 Road Traffic Act. - it applies to any public place. A public place is a place to which the public, or part thereof, have access.

If you have access to law books See Wilkinson's road traffic offences for further details. The complete set retails around £2-300, so you might want to try your library.

There are numerous precedents DPP v Vivier [1991] Crim LR 637, DPP v Neville [1996] 160 JP 758 and Cutter v Eagle Star Insurance Co. Ltd, Clarke v Kato and Others [1998] 4 All ER 417.

do your research before stepping up:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/199 ... g-offences
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/road ... P327_35945
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTr ... /DG_069869
http://www3.lancashire.gov.uk/corporate ... =29027&e=e
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/66

I welcome debating this with you once you are up to speed..

Sirius631

mar_k wrote:

I feel my comment has been taken out of context. Im not talking about private gardens, and personnel belongings
Im talking of through roads, there is one in muswell hill, says 'private road' on it even though there isnt a gate.
in that instance whats really to stop me walking or cycling through from one end to the next?
Nothing,

Your conscience? A door is suffiecient deterant for an honest person, it doesn't matter if it is locked or not. For door read 'gate'. The status of the road will be shown on Landranger maps.

diy

MattC59 wrote:

diy wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Am I in the wrong from a highway code/legal perspective or not?

No/unlikely

Not even 'unlikely', not at all is a better answer. However, if the residents (assuming that they also own a share of the road as part of their deeds) decided to take civil action, then you could be done for trespass. (If the court could be ar*ed !! )

Add trespass to the list of things you need to research. Here are some clues:
- what damages would be claimable?
- who could sue (given the requirements on the possessor in order to bring a claim)?

vanleapo

I'm just glad I live in Scotland, where the right to roam legislation means you can cycle just about anywhere as long as you aren't doing any damage.

unixnerd

Same here, the Scottish right to roam is superb. If anyone tries to lock you out of a path without legitimate reason (forestry operations that would be a safety hazard for example) you can just report them to the Access Commissioner.

If I lived in England I'd start of those No.10 petitions that mandates a parliamentary debate when you get 100,000 signatures, can't believe it'd take long. The current laws seem to be a few centuries out of date.

d87francis

To trespass is a civil offence so I'd just go for it and tell her to sue you. So long as you don't cause any damage I wouldn't worry.