Liability for personal injury associated with an illegally parked vehicle

Iwannahurl

The thread about liability if a child's ball hits a car prompted me to post this here.

Disclaimer: I am not seeking legal advice about an actual case. This is purely hypothetical, although IMO not an unlikely scenario.

Illegal parking on footpaths is so widespread in this country that it has become completely normal. It drives me bonkers, so I think (and post) about it a lot.

The obstruction of pavements very often means that pedestrians, people pushing buggies, wheelchair users, vision-impaired people and senior citizens using walking aids have to go out on the road. This too is considered to be unremarkable by both offenders and enforcers.

However, a very recent incident (followed by reading the above post) made me wonder.

While taking my two toddlers for a bit of exercise around my neighbourhood, I encountered the bog-standard obstruction of the footpath. Someone had parked diagonally across the pavement, with the rear of the car protruding into the road and the front extending into a driveway. It was lunchtime, so the road was somewhat busy with traffic.

As the three of us approached the car which was blocking the footpath, some cars were about to pass by on the road. At the same moment, the owner of the illegally parked car came out of the house with her two children, chatting with the woman she had been visiting.

To proceed, I reckon I had (at least) four options:

1. Walk my children out on the road despite the approaching traffic
2. Wait for the traffic to pass, then walk my children out on the road
3. Wait for the driver of the car to finish her conversation, put her children in the car and drive off, graciously leaving the public footway free for us pedestrians
4. Keep going, but stay off the road, ie walk the kids past the happily chatting footpath blockers over the private driveway and then back onto the public footpath.

I chose #4. As my kids and I went round the illegally parked car and through the chatting group, they stopped talking and their jaws dropped slightly, as if suddenly confronted in their home by some mildly deranged intruders.

As we walked away along the unobstructed footpath on the other side, the lady of the house was muttering something to her visitor. The illegal parker than said loudly, for my benefit, "I couldn't care less".

Should she, though? And should I?

If I or my children were harmed when walking out on the road, whether or not traffic was passing, who might be liable? I'm thinking here of a fall or being hit by a vehicle.

If I or my children were harmed while bypassing the obstruction over private property, who might be liable?

Or is a motorist in such a situation pretty much immune from all but on-the-spot parking law enforcement? Which of course is non-existent in our area. I have frequently contacted the local authority, and occasionally AGS, but it seems their policy is to do absolutely nothing. Calling the enforcers in was not an option.

daenerysstormborn3

I could be wrong but if you fell on the main road due to a defect in the road you would be suing the council and they in turn might sue the person parked illegally but I'd say that would be highly unlikely. If you were hit by a vehicle you would be suing the driver who in turn might sue the person parked illegally but again, not a lot of people would pursue that avenue. If you fell or injured yourself while on private property I don't know what the outcome would be with suing someone, it would probably be a bit hairy.

paky

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The thread about liability if a child's ball hits a car prompted me to post this here.

Disclaimer: I am not seeking legal advice about an actual case. This is purely hypothetical, although IMO not an unlikely scenario.

Illegal parking on footpaths is so widespread in this country that it has become completely normal. It drives me bonkers, so I think (and post) about it a lot.

The obstruction of pavements very often means that pedestrians, people pushing buggies, wheelchair users, vision-impaired people and senior citizens using walking aids have to go out on the road. This too is considered to be unremarkable by both offenders and enforcers.

However, a very recent incident (followed by reading the above post) made me wonder.

While taking my two toddlers for a bit of exercise around my neighbourhood, I encountered the bog-standard obstruction of the footpath. Someone had parked diagonally across the pavement, with the rear of the car protruding into the road and the front extending into a driveway. It was lunchtime, so the road was somewhat busy with traffic.

As the three of us approached the car which was blocking the footpath, some cars were about to pass by on the road. At the same moment, the owner of the illegally parked car came out of the house with her two children, chatting with the woman she had been visiting.

To proceed, I reckon I had (at least) four options:

1. Walk my children out on the road despite the approaching traffic
2. Wait for the traffic to pass, then walk my children out on the road
3. Wait for the driver of the car to finish her conversation, put her children in the car and drive off, graciously leaving the public footway free for us pedestrians
4. Keep going, but stay off the road, ie walk the kids past the happily chatting footpath blockers over the private driveway and then back onto the public footpath.

I chose #4. As my kids and I went round the illegally parked car and through the chatting group, they stopped talking and their jaws dropped slightly, as if suddenly confronted in their home by some mildly deranged intruders.

As we walked away along the unobstructed footpath on the other side, the lady of the house was muttering something to her visitor. The illegal parker than said loudly, for my benefit, "I couldn't care less".

Should she, though? And should I?

If I or my children were harmed when walking out on the road, whether or not traffic was passing, who might be liable? I'm thinking here of a fall or being hit by a vehicle.

If I or my children were harmed while bypassing the obstruction over private property, who might be liable?

Or is a motorist in such a situation pretty much immune from all but on-the-spot parking law enforcement? Which of course is non-existent in our area. I have frequently contacted the local authority, and occasionally AGS, but it seems their policy is to do absolutely nothing. Calling the enforcers in was not an option.

im sure if you could call a clamper that they might be able to do something.

mikemac1

Next time let the children walk over the bonnet

Or you do it yourself

Give the driver the shock they need to wake them up

ResearchWill

Personally I would have asked the person to remove the offending vehicle. It is an offence to park and be a danger to others. The following has been amended, but the original

The important section is in bold.

Section 55 RTA 1961.


55.—(1) A person shall not park in a public place a vehicle in such a position or in such condition or in such circumstances as to be likely to cause danger to other persons using the place.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) of this section shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction—

(a) in the case of—

(i) a first offence where any part of the period of the contravention was a period within lighting-up hours (as declared by regulations under section 11 of this Act) during which the vehicle did not fulfil the requirements imposed by law with respect to lighting and reflectors, or

(ii) a second or any subsequent offence,

to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds or, at the discretion of the court, to imprisonment for any term not exceeding three months or to both such fine and such imprisonment, and

(b) in any other case—to a fine not exceeding twenty pounds or, at the discretion of the court, to imprisonment for any term not exceeding one month or to both such fine and such imprisonment.

(3) If and so long as, this section having come into operation, the repeal by this Act of Part X of the repealed Act has not come into operation, “(within the meaning of the repealed Act)” shall be substituted in subparagraph (i) of paragraph (a) of subsection (2) of this section for “(as declared by regulations under section 11 of this Act)”.

Section 52 of the 1968 Act amended it

52.—Section 55 of the Principal Act is hereby amended by—

(a) the substitution of the following subsection for subsection (1):

“(1) A person shall not park a vehicle in a public place if, when so parked, the vehicle would be likely to cause danger to other persons using that place.”, and

(b) the insertion after subsection (3) of the following subsection:

“(4) Where a member of the Garda Síochána is of opinion that a person is committing or has committed an offence under this section, he may arrest the person without warrant.”

Again amended by section 69 of the 2010 Act


55.— (1) A person shall not park a vehicle in a public place if, when so parked, the vehicle would be likely to cause danger to other persons using that place.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction—

(a) in the case of—

(i) a first offence, where any part of the period of the contravention was a period within lighting-up hours (as declared by regulations under section 11) during which the vehicle did not fulfil the requirements imposed by law with respect to lighting and reflectors, or

(ii) a second or any subsequent offence,

to a fine not exceeding €3,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one month or to both, and

(b) in any other case, to a fine not exceeding €2,000.

(3) Where a member of the Garda Síochána is of opinion that a person is committing or has committed an offence under this section, he or she may arrest the person without warrant.”.

In relation to any injury caused, that is a difficult question to answer, as each case would have to be taken on its merits. As pointed out by another poster if you stepped out on to the road and you happened to be struck by another car, they may be able to argue that the parked car was in some way liable. But really would be a hard one to say unless there was a real case.

Iwannahurl

I'm aware of the laws/regulations and the Rules of the Road, as are the offending motorists presumably.

My problem is that I cannot get the enforcers to do anything about it. On the contrary, I have been warned off by Gardai especially when I have tried to insist that they act. The illegal parkers know this, and typically respond with apathy or aggression. Apart from being routinely told to Foxtrot Oscar, I usually get comments such as "I couldn't care less", "you're the only one who cares", "who's going to do anything about it?"

In any case, an incident such as the one I describe above would be long over by the time any Garda or Traffic Warden arrived on the scene, assuming they could be bothered in the first place.

My question really has to do with potential liability in the event of any harm that might occur when trying to find ways around such an obstacle. Staying at home or standing still like a stooge are not feasible options. By walking out onto the road or through private property, especially with my children, I am exposing myself to potential risk. Is the illegal parker fully liable in such situations?

ResearchWill

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I'm aware of the laws/regulations and the Rules of the Road, as are the offending motorists presumably.

My problem is that I cannot get the enforcers to do anything about it. On the contrary, I have been warned off by Gardai especially when I have tried to insist that they act. The illegal parkers know this, and typically respond with apathy or aggression. Apart from being routinely told to Foxtrot Oscar, I usually get comments such as "I couldn't care less", "you're the only one who cares", "who's going to do anything about it?"

In any case, an incident such as the one I describe above would be long over by the time any Garda or Traffic Warden arrived on the scene, assuming they could be bothered in the first place.

My question really has to do with potential liability in the event of any harm that might occur when trying to find ways around such an obstacle. Staying at home or standing still like a stooge are not feasible options. By walking out onto the road or through private property, especially with my children, I am exposing myself to potential risk. Is the illegal parker fully liable in such situations?

No one can give a blanket yes any car parked illegally is liable in all situations. Thats the problem, in certain cases yes defo liable in others no. As an example if I am driving down a residential road I should notice the badly parked car and react accordingly, slow down, give it a wide berth, maybe even stop to make sure a person is not about to walk around it. So it really is impossible to give a blanket answer.

In relation to AGS if they are not willing to prosecute, there is nothing stoping you requesting a summons be issued. If someone is doing this regularly, take photos, inform them of your intention to prosecute, and follow it through. You and any citizen can bring summary criminal proceedings as a common informer.

Iwannahurl

ResearchWill wrote: »

No one can give a blanket yes any car parked illegally is liable in all situations. Thats the problem, in certain cases yes defo liable in others no. As an example if I am driving down a residential road I should notice the badly parked car and react accordingly, slow down, give it a wide berth, maybe even stop to make sure a person is not about to walk around it. So it really is impossible to give a blanket answer.

In relation to AGS if they are not willing to prosecute, there is nothing stoping you requesting a summons be issued. If someone is doing this regularly, take photos, inform them of your intention to prosecute, and follow it through. You and any citizen can bring summary criminal proceedings as a common informer.

I didn't know that. Interesting.

http://www.euro-justice.com/member_states/ireland/country_report/444/

Mind you, a quick Google search reveals that Common Informers (under ancient British law) were regarded as a "detestable race" of "viperous vermin"!

ResearchWill

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I didn't know that. Interesting.

http://www.euro-justice.com/member_states/ireland/country_report/444/

Mind you, a quick Google search reveals that Common Informers (under ancient British law) were regarded as a "detestable race" of "viperous vermin"!

That is because common informers used to get a reward for a guilty verdict, leading to some giving false evidence to get the money.

paky

ResearchWill wrote: »

Personally I would have asked the person to remove the offending vehicle. It is an offence to park and be a danger to others. The following has been amended, but the original

The important section is in bold.

Section 55 RTA 1961.


55.—(1) A person shall not park in a public place a vehicle in such a position or in such condition or in such circumstances as to be likely to cause danger to other persons using the place.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) of this section shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction—

(a) in the case of—

(i) a first offence where any part of the period of the contravention was a period within lighting-up hours (as declared by regulations under section 11 of this Act) during which the vehicle did not fulfil the requirements imposed by law with respect to lighting and reflectors, or

(ii) a second or any subsequent offence,

to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds or, at the discretion of the court, to imprisonment for any term not exceeding three months or to both such fine and such imprisonment, and

(b) in any other case—to a fine not exceeding twenty pounds or, at the discretion of the court, to imprisonment for any term not exceeding one month or to both such fine and such imprisonment.

(3) If and so long as, this section having come into operation, the repeal by this Act of Part X of the repealed Act has not come into operation, “(within the meaning of the repealed Act)” shall be substituted in subparagraph (i) of paragraph (a) of subsection (2) of this section for “(as declared by regulations under section 11 of this Act)”.

Section 52 of the 1968 Act amended it

52.—Section 55 of the Principal Act is hereby amended by—

(a) the substitution of the following subsection for subsection (1):

“(1) A person shall not park a vehicle in a public place if, when so parked, the vehicle would be likely to cause danger to other persons using that place.”, and

(b) the insertion after subsection (3) of the following subsection:

“(4) Where a member of the Garda Síochána is of opinion that a person is committing or has committed an offence under this section, he may arrest the person without warrant.”

Again amended by section 69 of the 2010 Act


55.— (1) A person shall not park a vehicle in a public place if, when so parked, the vehicle would be likely to cause danger to other persons using that place.

(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction—

(a) in the case of—

(i) a first offence, where any part of the period of the contravention was a period within lighting-up hours (as declared by regulations under section 11) during which the vehicle did not fulfil the requirements imposed by law with respect to lighting and reflectors, or

(ii) a second or any subsequent offence,

to a fine not exceeding €3,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one month or to both, and

(b) in any other case, to a fine not exceeding €2,000.

(3) Where a member of the Garda Síochána is of opinion that a person is committing or has committed an offence under this section, he or she may arrest the person without warrant.”.

In relation to any injury caused, that is a difficult question to answer, as each case would have to be taken on its merits. As pointed out by another poster if you stepped out on to the road and you happened to be struck by another car, they may be able to argue that the parked car was in some way liable. But really would be a hard one to say unless there was a real case.

op take a copy of this and put it in their mail box. any reasonable person would stop doing what they're doing once they realise it's illegal

berrypendel

Iwannahurl wrote: »

. On the contrary, I have been warned off by Gardai especially when I have tried to insist that they act. The illegal parkers

complain to garda management in writing

berrypendel

ResearchWill wrote: »

No one can give a blanket yes any car parked illegally is liable in all situations. Thats the problem, in certain cases yes defo liable in others no. As an example if I am driving down a residential road I should notice the badly parked car and react accordingly, slow down, give it a wide berth, maybe even stop to make sure a person is not about to walk around it. So it really is impossible to give a blanket answer.

In relation to AGS if they are not willing to prosecute, there is nothing stoping you requesting a summons be issued. If someone is doing this regularly, take photos, inform them of your intention to prosecute, and follow it through. You and any citizen can bring summary criminal proceedings as a common informer.

why should some ordinary person do the garda job for them?

MagicSean

I can't see how liability would attach unless it was the only route to take and their was no way of turning back. A reasonable person would probably go back a bit and cross safely and avoid the obstruction by using the other side of the road as opposed to trying to navigate it dangerously. Of course this may not apply in your own situation. As someone said it would have to be looked at on a case by case basis but if there was a reasonable alternative route I would say there would be little civil liability attached. On the other hand, if the only alternative was a one hour detour then a person may have little option but to navigate the obstruction and liability may apply.

What do you mean you were warned off by the Gardaí? Is it a common thing with the same car? Are there double yellow lines or a continuos white line there? Have you notifed the council about it and highlighted the danger?

seamus

berrypendel wrote: »

why should some ordinary person do the garda job for them?

Because something isn't only illegal if it's been seen by a Garda. Why shouldn't an ordinary person choose this route if the law has been broken.

In the OP's case, liability is always a thorny one because you have to evaluate everyone's own personal responsibility. If you're hit by a car while walking around an illegally parked one, there's the obvious question of why weren't you exercising appropriate care. Likewise for the vehicle which struck you.

I suspect, even though the car would have been parked illegally, that the owner would have no liability because strictly speaking they didn't do anything to cause such an accident.

Illegal or dangerous parking is such a scourge in cities and towns and yet Gardai don't seem to be that bothered doing anything about it. It should be like shooting fish in a barrel, yet I've seen patrol cars and foot patrols just keep on going by and ignoring it.

slum dog

ram a shopping trolly into the side of their car door and say you did by 'accident'

ResearchWill

berrypendel wrote: »

why should some ordinary person do the garda job for them?

Because they can!

berrypendel

seamus wrote: »

Because something isn't only illegal if it's been seen by a Garda. Why shouldn't an ordinary person choose this route if the law has been broken.

In the OP's case, liability is always a thorny one because you have to evaluate everyone's own personal responsibility. If you're hit by a car while walking around an illegally parked one, there's the obvious question of why weren't you exercising appropriate care. Likewise for the vehicle which struck you.

I suspect, even though the car would have been parked illegally, that the owner would have no liability because strictly speaking they didn't do anything to cause such an accident.

Illegal or dangerous parking is such a scourge in cities and towns and yet Gardai don't seem to be that bothered doing anything about it. It should be like shooting fish in a barrel, yet I've seen patrol cars and foot patrols just keep on going by and ignoring it.

that is beside the point op said they had been warned off. the garda are obliged to respond to a dangerous parking situation

yet I've seen patrol cars and foot patrols just keep on going by and ignoring it.

in other words they do not do their job

berrypendel

ResearchWill wrote: »

Because they can!

excuse for the garda

ResearchWill

berrypendel wrote: »

excuse for the garda

The law allows it, as a citizen if you see a wrong why not try and fix it. If AGS don't see it as an issue, then it is open for any citizen to prosecute if they so wish, some may call it being a good citizen.

MagicSean

berrypendel wrote: »

that is beside the point op said they had been warned off. the garda are obliged to respond to a dangerous parking situation

Is this a statutory obligation or did you make it up? Are traffic wardens also obliged?

MagicSean

berrypendel wrote: »

excuse for the garda

A Garda can't prosecute someone for something they haven't seen. So in the ops case she would have to make a statement and be prepared to go to court about it. That's assuming the DPP agrees to prosecute someone who moved their car while the op was still there.

Also, you have to remember that what you might think is dangerous may not actually be dangerous in a legal sense but merely inconvenient.

Finally, a few months ago I sat in court and watched a judge throw out a load of summons cases for people parking on double yellow lines at a roundabout because "Everybody parks there". Until that judge left there were no other tickets given to people parking in that area because basically, what was the point?

So to summarise, there are many reasons why a Garda may not act on a situation and unless he gives you the reason there is really no way for you to make a judgement on wether ot not he is doing his job.

berrypendel

MagicSean wrote: »

Is this a statutory obligation or did you make it up? Are traffic wardens also obliged?

they are obliged to enforce the rta .

berrypendel

MagicSean wrote: »

A Garda can't prosecute someone for something they haven't seen. So in the ops case she would have to make a statement and be prepared to go to court about it. b.

op said he/she was warned off. why would a garda warn someone off in that situation

A Garda can't prosecute someone for something they haven't seen.

they can folow up a complaint and see it or even call to house on foot of a complaint

berrypendel

ResearchWill wrote: »

The law allows it, as a citizen if you see a wrong why not try and fix it. If AGS don't see it as an issue, then it is open for any citizen to prosecute if they so wish, some may call it being a good citizen.

then why are the garda alway on about safety

MagicSean

berrypendel wrote: »

they are obliged to enforce the rta .

They are employed to enforce it.

berrypendel wrote: »

op said he/she was warned off. why would a garda warn someone off in that situation

I too am curious as to how the op was "warned off".

berrypendel wrote: »

they can folow up a complaint and see it or even call to house on foot of a complaint

The car was gone and it belonged to a visitor to the house. What follow up could they legally do there? The house owner hasn't done anything wrong.

stovelid

Somebody near me does this all the time and right by a dangerous bend on the road.

Unfortunately for them, it also puts their car in serious danger of deep accidental scratches in the paintwork as you try and squeeze by with a buggy but I guess that's the risk they take.

castie

What would happen if while walking behind the car and trying to stay off the road as much as possible the car got scratched by a buggy or something?

Is the walker liable for damage?

berrypendel

MagicSean wrote: »

They are employed to enforce it.



I too am curious as to how the op was "warned off".



The car was gone and it belonged to a visitor to the house. What follow up could they legally do there? The house owner hasn't done anything wrong.

with a reg number they could follow up. they are obliged to enforce rta. Now i have seen your arguments for your and i am not going to entertain you further

Marcusm

in circumstances such as these i generally whip out my phone and take a few photos. If the driver is in the car they'll generally take the message and correct their parking.