Jump to content

Recommended Posts

One of my neighbours suggested I start a thread to highlight some very thoughtless parking by a very unpleasant man. It may not be clear on the photo, but this motorist took up two parking spaces when he could easily have moved his car forward and left enough space behind him. When I politely pointed this out to him, he became really quite aggressive. Oh dear.
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/193605-yourparkingsucks/
Share on other sites

Dear Inbound, notwithstanding your guide to parallel parking, there was not enough room behind. I?m sorry if the photograph gave you this impression. You can gain a better idea of the space by looking at the kerb stones. Enough for a Smart car perhaps, but not much else.

edcam, no need for that; I?m sure Inbound was trying to be helpful.

Our road often has no free parking spaces, but loads of big almost-gaps. It drives me mad. People should park up reasonably but not oppressively close to the next car along, or if a massive gap at the time, use their imagination as to placing themselves in the least obstructive position to allow the maximum number of cars to park later.

"front wheel is angled outwards " is this really good advice ? Particularly in narrow roads where much squeezing past of vehicles goes on .


The trouble with assumed poor parking is that it needs to be witnessed while taking place .Otherwise who knows what the state of play was when the car was left and what changes in car positioning have taken place .

My car sometimes looks as though I need a space big enough for a double decker. However, this usually occurs when I have parked in a tight spot (I drive a small car), then a couple of 4x4s park, then move and are replaced by small cars. Suddenly there are ?nearly spaces? around.

"front wheel is angled outwards" isn't the correct procedure...the first manoeuvre should be to reverse back as far as you can go, with your wheels straight, to give you the most amount of room at the front, then you are in a better position to pull out.

Parking with your wheels angled outwards is dangerous.

Balderdash! If you were on a hill then it would prevent the car from rolling off if the handbrake was to fail. The object of leaving then angled is to allow to pull out without having to manoeuvre back and forth to gain the space need to turn the wheel outwards in a really tight space.

Less of the balderdash ,Inbound .


THe Highway Code has this to say about parking

Parking (rules 239 to 247)

Rule 239

Use off-street parking areas, or bays marked out with white lines on the road as parking places, wherever possible. If you have to stop on the roadside:


do not park facing against the traffic flow

stop as close as you can to the side

do not stop too close to a vehicle displaying a Blue Badge: remember, the occupant may need more room to get in or out

you MUST switch off the engine, headlights and fog lights

you MUST apply the handbrake before leaving the vehicle

you MUST ensure you do not hit anyone when you open your door. Check for cyclists or other traffic

it is safer for your passengers (especially children) to get out of the vehicle on the side next to the kerb

put all valuables out of sight and make sure your vehicle is secure

lock your vehicle.


It used to be a practice to leave a car in reverse gear when parked on a hill in the belief that this would counteract movement if the handbrake failed .I've no idea if this would work in practice ,but might be worth a go .

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> It used to be a practice to leave a car in reverse

> gear when parked on a hill in the belief that this

> would counteract movement if the handbrake failed

> .I've no idea if this would work in practice ,but

> might be worth a go .


Wow yes - that's what I was taught a long time ago.

Inbound Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Balderdash! If you were on a hill then it would

> prevent the car from rolling off if the handbrake

> was to fail. The object of leaving then angled is

> to allow to pull out without having to manoeuvre

> back and forth to gain the space need to turn the

> wheel outwards in a really tight space.



I thought we were talking about trying to get in and out of a tight parking space?


'wheels facing outwards' might help on the rare occasion that you are on a hill AND your handbrake fails but for the common 'driving out of a tight spot', reversing back into the remaining space, however small, requires the wheels to be straight. If you left the wheels pointing at an angle and tried this, you would just move closer to the kerb.

A good driving instructor would tell you 'for the benefit of moving off again, finish parking with your wheels straight'.


It's not Balderdash, it's parallel parking.

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> intexasatthe moment Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > It used to be a practice to leave a car in

> reverse

> > gear when parked on a hill in the belief that

> this

> > would counteract movement if the handbrake

> failed

> > .I've no idea if this would work in practice

> ,but

> > might be worth a go .

>

> Wow yes - that's what I was taught a long time

> ago.



I always do that!

I was told that originally too, then later I was advised it's better to leave it in top gear. Can't remember why any more though. Less likely to slip out of gear, perhaps?


Anyone else forget by the time they get back in?


ETA: maybe it's top gear when you park facing uphill?

Michael Mcintyre parking on double yellows outside his kid's school. Didn't deserve an attack by the moped gang but still a pretty wonker thing to do. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/michael-mcintyre-robbed-by-moped-thieves-in-london-while-waiting-to-pick-children-up-from-school-a3855266.html

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

    • “There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda ” I would call this “generous”   Labour should never have made that tax promise because, as with - duh - Brexit, it’s pretending the real world doesn’t exist now. I blame Labour in no small part for this delusion. But the electorate need to cop on as well.  They think they can have everything they want without responsibilities, costs or attachments. The media encourage this  Labour do need to raise taxes. The country needs it.  Now, exactly how it’s done remains to be seen. But if people are just going to go around going “la la laffer curve. Liars! String em up! Vote someone else” then they just aren’t serious people reckoning with the problem yes Labour are more than a year into their term, but after 14 years of what the Tories  did? Whoever takes over, has a major problem 
    • Messaging, messaging, messaging. That's all it boils down to. There are only so many fiscal policies out there, and they're there for the taking, no matter which party you're in. I hate to say it, but Farage gets it right every time. Even when Reform reneges on fiscal policy, it does it with enough confidence and candidness that no one is wringing their hands. Instead, they're quietly admired for their pragmatism. Strangely, it's exactly the same as Labour has done, with its manifesto reverse on income tax, but it's going to bomb.  Blaming the Tories / Brexit / Covid / Putin ... none of it washes with the public anymore  - it wants to be sold a vision of the future, not reminded of the disasters of the past. Labour put itself on the back foot with its 'the tories fucked it all up' stance right at the beginning of its tenure.  All Lammy had to do (as with Reeves and Raynor etc) was say 'mea culpa. We've made a mistake, we'll fix it. Sorry guys, we're on it'. But instead it's 'nothing to see here / it's someone else's fault / I was buying a suit / hadn't been briefed yet'.  And, of course, the press smells blood, which never helps.  Oh! And Reeve's speech on Wednesday was so drab and predictable that even the journalists at the press conference couldn't really be arsed to come up with any challenging questions. 
    • Niko 07818 607 583 has been doing jobs for us for several years, he is reliable, always there for us, highly recommended! 
    • I am keeping my fingers crossed the next few days are not so loud. I honestly think it is the private, back garden displays that are most problematic as, in general, there is no way of knowing when and where they might happen. For those letting off a few bangers in the garden I get it is tempting to think what's the harm in a few minutes of 'fun', but it is the absolute randomness of sudden bangs that can do irreparable damage to people and animals. With organised events that are well advertised there is some forewarning at least, and the hope is that organisers of such events can be persuaded to adopt and make a virtue of using only low noise displays in future.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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