A furious homeowner in Chester has pledged to challenge his local authority after receiving a parking fine for leaving his car on the tarmac directly outside his own property.
The 'Ridiculous' Fine That Sparked a Fight
David Miller, a 49-year-old business consultant, was stunned to find a £35 penalty charge notice on his Jaguar F-Type on the morning of Monday, January 12. He had parked the vehicle the previous evening on a six-metre stretch of tarmac immediately outside the gate to his three-bedroom home in Chester, Cheshire.
The parking incident occurred while Mr Miller's house was undergoing roof renovations. With building materials blocking his driveway, he believed the area outside his gate was a sensible and safe alternative. He states he has parked there intermittently for the past decade without any issue.
A Clash of Interpretations: Driveway or Highway?
According to Cheshire West and Chester Council, the tarmac is an adopted part of the road and is covered by double yellow lines, making parking there a contravention of the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO). A council spokesperson explained that enforcement visits increased following complaints about parking in the area.
Mr Miller vehemently disputes this interpretation. He argues the tarmac functions as an extension of his driveway, connecting his property to the main highway. "It isn't like it leads to a footpath, or anyone else's houses, mine is the only one it takes you to," he said. "The car being there isn't blocking anything or causing any inconvenience to anyone."
He also points to a dropped kerb between the yellow lines and the road, which a solicitor who contacted him suggested creates a legal break. Mr Miller contends that if parking was prohibited, the yellow lines would be painted right up to his gate.
Taking the Council On After Failed Appeal
Mr Miller's initial appeal against the fine was rejected by the council, strengthening his resolve to fight what he calls a "money-making exercise." He feels particularly aggrieved as he maintains the surrounding grassed area at his own expense, which he believes saves public money.
"I was shocked when I saw the ticket on the windshield," he recalled. "The car was well behind the yellow lines... I have had neighbours get tickets for similar things and they have been rescinded. Why is mine being treated differently?"
With legal support, Mr Miller is preparing a further challenge. The key points of his case include:
- The presence and positioning of the dropped kerb.
- Questions over the adequacy of signage.
- The historical use of the spot without penalty.
- The fact the parked vehicle only obstructed access to his own property.
The council maintains its position, stating: "The double yellow lines extend from the centre of the carriageway to the land boundary, which in this case is the resident's fence. Vehicles parked on this land or the adjacent grassed area are considered to be in contravention of the restrictions."
