Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Looking for a bit of advice really... I live on a small residential road near Peckham Rye. A local business has been leaving old, rusty campervans parked on our street for days on end. Takes up parking spaces for people (like me!) who live on our road, plus bit of an eyesore. Not that our street's won prizes for being the prettiest or anything.


I realise that it's a public street, and I wouldn't want residential parking permits, but is there anything that the council can do? Or do I just have to put up with it (as I was told by the manager of the company earlier today).


Thanks.

It depends if the owner of the vehicles is operating under any kind of licensing. If the owner parks their vehicles on a regular basis, either the local council or the area office of the traffic commissioners, who set operating restrictions on all transport firms - will know if they may be contravening these restrictions. Operators licences are required for commercial vehicles with a plated weight of 3.5tonnes or an unladen weight of 1.5tonnes. To gain a licence an operator has to provide details of where their vehicles will be parked, this is the operating centre. And there are differing lowering limits on the number of vehicles operated as to whether a company needs a licence.

Despite not being able to do anything about it, or perhaps because of not being able to do anyting about it I experience so much frustration on the road I live due to it resembling a parking lot for bloody estate agent mini's and beetle's. They rag these cars which of course they do not own at high speed and at any given moment there are probably no less than 4/5 of them parked, making it that much harder for residents to park.


What you gonna do......?.......nothing

Well, the latest is on a trailer and neither the van nor the trailer display tax discs. The van is also being used as a rubbish tip!


Re the operating licence - depressing that the council might give a licence to a company leaving clapped out and rusty campervans on a residential road. Maybe I'll check into it...


And I feel for you southside73 - that must be really frustrating!

Southwark will on request freely remove residents' unwanted vehicles, regardless of tax status. They will also remove an abandoned vehicle if it meets a number of conditions, including being untaxed. But I can't find any evidence that Southwark will remove a vehicle solely because it is untaxed.
Well every tenant for example has as part of the their tenancy agreement that vehicles not displaying a current tax disc will be removed. Community wardens have the power to report vehicles not displaying a current tax disk and you will regularly see vehicles clamped because of this - clamps placed by Southwark Council. They are then usually removed within 24 hours.
A similar problem has occured before though it is probably several years ago now. I recall that it originated with the Garages located in the mews parallel to Barry Road and accessed off Tyrrell Road. Following a complaint/s to the Council the parking of accident damaged cars as it was then improved significantly. Perhaps we could write a residents letter to the Garage raising our concerns about it and asking them to kindly stop doing this, probably cc'd to local Councillors. Happy to contribute/sign if that is the case.

i live near said problem and its become a problem since the new tenants moved into the commercial premise.


I wouldn't mind but if you look at Google Earth there's significant space to park vehicles on their land yet they park massive (and a mean massive) vehicles on the street, leaving little space to park.


Strictly its not illegal, just a 'little' inconsiderate. His rates will be less than my council tax and only have one car, not 7 battered commercials.


This isn't the only problem with this unit. Prior (2008) they operated 9-5 Mon-Fri and now they open 7 days a week and until late up to 11 and their lights are on until 3AM.


There must be terms to their commercial usage, for opening hours?

I've noticed about 10 vans parked on roads in the area today, the trailer has been attached to another van which is taxed. It's now parked on double yellow lines, so I can only hope for one of the Southwark parking camera cars to spot it. When I asked if the vehicles belonged to the company earlier this week, the manager mentioned to me that he pays ?3,000 a yr in business taxes and feels that this gives him the right to park on the roads in the area.


Maybe a letter from the residents copied to the council is the way to go. Especially if it worked last time.


Thanks for all the advice.

?3000.


That's kind of irrelevant. I think this point is less about 'rights' and more about common courtesy and understanding your neighbours.


I was more than happy with their setup before the change in tennants but now its a bit of a piss take.


Glad you said something as saying nothing is basically assuming that what he's doing is fine.


Just f's me off when you see the space they have on site.

i too live in the immediate area and have noticed the vans littering tyrrell, hindmans and ferris road in the past couple of weeks as well as a horsebox that hasn't moved in about 6 months and one resident in a flat who has about 5 cars parked in the road... not much hope for the residents to find a parking space...


i don't think we are 'covered' by James B though are we are we come under peckham ward or something (sorry not to up on politics)...

the manager mentioned to me that he pays ?3,000 a yr in business taxes and feels that this gives him the right to park on the roads in the area


No it doesn't....and you should tell him that. If the vehicles weigh more than 1.5 tonnes he definitely needs an operating licence which defines where the vehicles will be parked. And to put that in context...a ford transit van weighs 2.5 tonnes. A small VW camper van comes in a just under a ton, but most larger motor homes defintely exceed 1.5 tonnes. So if he is parking large vans and camper vans as part of his business then he needs another licence.


Peckham Rye on the Barry Road side IS part of ED ward btw but if you are indeed part of Peckham Rye and Nunhead ward then pm me and I can give you the details of the councillors. Also if you pm me the name and address of the business I'll have a quick look at their business operating licence, just on the off chance (if they are a motor related trade) that it stipulates any conditions with regards to storage of vehicles.

I have emailed Cllr Gavin Edwards about it and he said he will look into it. It might be a good idea for others who live in Tyrrell and Hindmans and the other road which I cannot remember the name of, to email him too about it too so that it isn't just one voice. His email address is on the Council's website.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • So top of Lane. Local Sainsbury, middle Co Op and M and S and bottom Tesco Express…..now everyone should be happy except those that want a Waitrose as well…0h and  don’t forget M and S near ED Station….
    • Direct link to joint statement : https://thehaguegroup.org/meetings-bogota-en/?link_id=2&can_id=2d0a0048aad3d4915e3e761ac87ffe47&source=email-pi-briefing-no-26-the-bogota-breakthrough&email_referrer=email_2819587&email_subject=pi-briefing-no-26-the-bogot_-breakthrough&&   No. 26 | The Bogotá Breakthrough “The era of impunity is over.” That was the message from Bogotá, Colombia, where governments from across the Global South and beyond took the most ambitious coordinated action since Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza began 21 months ago. Convened by The Hague Group and co-chaired by the governments of Colombia and South Africa, the Emergency Conference on Palestine brought together 30 states for two days of intensive deliberation — and emerged with a concrete, coordinated six-point plan to restrain Israel’s war machine and uphold international law. States took up the call from their host, Colombian President and Progressive International Council Member Gustavo Petro, who had urged them to be “protagonists together.” Twelve governments signed onto the measures immediately. The rest now have a deadline: 20 September 2025, on the eve of the United Nations General Assembly. The unprecedented six measures commit states to:     Prevent military and dual use exports to Israel.     Refuse Israeli weapons transfers at their ports.     Prevent vessels carrying weapons to Israel under their national flags.     Review all public contracts to prevent public institutions and funds from supporting Israel’s illegal occupation.     Pursue justice for international crimes.     Support universal jurisdiction to hold perpetrators accountable. “We came to Bogotá to make history — and we did,” said Colombian President Gustavo Petro. “Together, we have begun the work of ending the era of impunity. These measures show that we will no longer allow international law to be treated as optional, or Palestinian life as disposable.” The measures are not symbolic. They are grounded in binding obligations under international law — including the International Court of Justice’s July 2024 advisory opinion declaring Israel’s occupation unlawful, and September 2024’s UN General Assembly Resolution ES-10/24, which gave states a 12-month deadline to act. UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory Francesca Albanese called them “a momentous step forward.” “The Hague Group was born to advance international law in an era of impunity,” said South Africa’s Foreign Minister, Ronald Lamola. “The measures adopted in Bogotá show that we are serious — and that coordinated state action is possible.” The response from Washington was swift — and revealing. In a threatening statement to journalists, a US State Department spokesperson accused The Hague Group of “seeking to isolate Israel” and warned that the US would “aggressively defend our interests, our military, and our allies, including Israel, from such coordinated legal and diplomatic” actions. But instead of deterring action, the threats have only clarified the stakes. In Bogotá, states did not flinch. They acted — and they invite the world to join them. The deadline for further states to take up the measures is now two months away. And with it, the pressure is mounting for governments across the world — from Brazil to Ireland, Chile to Spain — to match words with action. As Albanese said, “the clock is now ticking for states — from Europe to the Arab world and beyond — to join them.” This is not a moment to observe. It is a moment to act. Share the Joint Statement from Bogotá and popularise the six measures. Write to your elected representative and your government and demand they sign on before 20 September. History was made in Bogotá. Now, it’s up to all of us to ensure it becomes reality, that Palestinian life is not disposable and international law is not optional. The era of impunity is coming to an end. Palestine is not alone. In solidarity, The Progressive International Secretariat  
    • Most countries charge for entry to museums and galleries, often a different rate for locals (tax payers) and foreign nationals. The National Gallery could do this, also places like the Museums in South Kensington, the British Library and other tax-funded institutions. Many cities abroad add a tourist tax to hotel bills. It means tourists help pay for public services.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...