Driver says temporary signs are smaller than laptop screen

2:20pm Wednesday 20th February 2013 in News By Neil Watts

TEMPORARY RANK: Parking bays by Foregate Street Bridge where Mrs Baldwin was fined. 0813250801 TEMPORARY RANK: Parking bays by Foregate Street Bridge where Mrs Baldwin was fined. 0813250801

A MOTORIST feels better signage near long-running repair work would have helped her avoid receiving a parking ticket.

Rachael Baldwin, of Fernhill Heath, parked in an area normally used as public parking bays by Foregate Street Bridge for about three minutes on January 23 while she collected tickets from the station.

However, it is currently a temporary taxi rank while Network Rail carry out a refurbishment scheme and Mrs Baldwin, aged 44, feels the signage is inadequate and placed differently to the usual 45-minute waiting signs.

She said: “The actual signage is very, very small – smaller than a laptop screen – and it’s on a long pole above eyesight height. I honestly could not see it.

“If it had been clearly signposted I would not have parked there.”

Mrs Baldwin paid a £35 fine when her appeal was turned down.

As previously reported work to the bridge was due to finish on August 31 last year but workmen found more corrosion than expected and a new timetable for the work had to be drawn up with everything due to return to normal by Friday, March 15.

A Worcester City Council spokesman said: “Temporary road markings have been put in place, but they have faded because the bridge work has lasted longer than expected.

“We have asked the county council, as the highways authority, to repaint the road markings. Signs are also in place, which clearly indicate the parking bays are currently in use as a taxi rank, and therefore it is illegal for vehicles other than taxis to park there.

“Our civil enforcement officers will not issue penalty charge notices if the road markings and signs that define a parking area are not clearly visible.

“In the case of Foregate Street the lines have faded, but they and the signs are visible.”

Jon Fraser, the county council’s highways manager, said: "The signs and road markings on Foregate Street are visible and these clearly indicate that the parking bays are currently in use as a taxi rank.”

Following a request under the Freedom of Information Act, Mrs Baldwin discovered the city council has collected £9,583 from 237 penalty charges and received two complaints from members of the public.

Comments(26)

Sir Smeg says...
3:30pm Wed 20 Feb 13

A pity taxi drivers that park in the disabled bays in Trinity Street don't get the same treatment.

Report this post »

Samboy says...
3:34pm Wed 20 Feb 13

i feel strongly that people should obey restriction signs but in this instance the photo suggests that signage is as poor as that used by the parking companies which led to new regulations. The admission by the City that they asked for the signs to be repainted also implies that the signage is inadequate.

Report this post »

More Tea Vicar says...
4:04pm Wed 20 Feb 13

I can see both sides of this argument. The fact that they are taxi ranks is clear enough, but not so sure about the restrictions on other vehicles.

Either way, the road there is very 'cluttered' and confusing.

But it strikes me that virtually everything seems to be decided in favour of taxi drivers, who don't seem to be particularly fastidious about observing parking regulations. One rule for some...?

Report this post »

CYNIC_AL says...
6:44pm Wed 20 Feb 13

Maybe if there was a proper parking area for Foregate Street station then things like this wouldn't happen. I see thousands have been spent to give the bridge a wash down and fresh coat of paint yet the rest of the station is still as old and outdated as it ever was.

Report this post »

New Kid on the Block says...
9:45pm Wed 20 Feb 13

CYNIC_AL wrote:
Maybe if there was a proper parking area for Foregate Street station then things like this wouldn't happen. I see thousands have been spent to give the bridge a wash down and fresh coat of paint yet the rest of the station is still as old and outdated as it ever was.
The Bridge has had rather more than a wash down and a coat of paint.
The Station is next for refurbishment but I gather the plans did not meet with universal approval. So you might not like what you get.

Report this post »

Secret agent 46 says...
7:19am Thu 21 Feb 13

Why is it that worcester allow more spaces to taxi drivers and not people that are here to spend money.... Surely wouldn't it have been more sensible for the taxi to use the buss station and there fore freeing up spaces in town for parent/ child spaces....

Report this post »

green49 says...
7:23am Thu 21 Feb 13

Taxi's rule ok? the police and council are afraid of them as if they book any 'it might cause an incident' that is what was said to me by a policeman.

Report this post »

cabby2007 says...
7:38am Thu 21 Feb 13

same old story taxis have to many spaces. Next time look at the sign and dont park there what is so hard about that . I some think every one likes a good moan .

Report this post »

TmP says...
8:31am Thu 21 Feb 13

I must agree with the lady I made the same mistake although I realised and went to look again and moved my car. The signage is very indistinct and a mistake can easily be made. And yes the cabbies do have too many spaces and do seem to rule the parking in Worcester. Which is why if I want a quick shop, the bank and free 30 minute parking I pop over to Droitwich. If I want to park for longer I use the car park near to Morrisons which is cheaper then Worcester as long as one doesn't want the large M & S type stores the shops are better.

Report this post »

TDH123 says...
8:54am Thu 21 Feb 13

Simply painting "Taxis" on the road does not necessarily mean that there is an enforceable parking restriction! Has nobody considered an appeal having regard to the regulatory requirements?

Report this post »

Lew Smoralz says...
10:57am Thu 21 Feb 13

Yet another reason why I no longer spend any money in Worcester city. I refuse to be hounded, and treated like a second-class citizen by the people responsible for attracting shoppers to Worcester.

The ineptitude of these administrators is beyond belief. Who is more important to the shop owners of Worcester? Shoppers or the intimidating gangs of taxi drivers who dominate the city centre?

I continue shopping out of town, or use surrounding towns for a change. There I have free parking, only a short distance to walk in the rain, I am treated with respect and am not made to feel as though I am unwelcome.

No wonder Worcester has never been able to exploit its tourist potential. Its reputation as an unfriendly place precedes it.

Report this post »

one94 says...
12:38pm Thu 21 Feb 13

I would say there are good grounds to throw all of those fines out as the hashed lines are still white, which indicate parking bays. Regulaitons for taxi bays say they should be yellow.
.
http://www.ticketfig
hter.co.uk/signs.htm
#taxibay

Report this post »

raq says...
1:24pm Thu 21 Feb 13

Unfortunately, having appealed and lost, there was little more that I could do than pay the fine and try and make others aware of the poor signage to avoid the same fate! Apparently as the taxi rank is only 'temporary' Worcester City Council don't need Department for Transport approval for the signage. Having raked in nearly £10k in parking fines, they really don't have a great incentive to re-paint/make the signage more obvious do they? By the way, there were no taxis in the temporary rank at the time I parked there, but there were 3 other cars, the owners of which I suspect also failed to see the signs. By the way, I have nothing against taxis, or the City Council, but would just like to see fair play.

Report this post »

More Tea Vicar says...
2:04pm Thu 21 Feb 13

Secret agent 46 wrote:
Why is it that worcester allow more spaces to taxi drivers and not people that are here to spend money.... Surely wouldn't it have been more sensible for the taxi to use the buss station and there fore freeing up spaces in town for parent/ child spaces....
How dare you question the City's taxi policy!! I feel we do not have enough taxis, and should actually have a few thousand more. I would actually demolish the Cathedral and Guildhall to make way for more taxi parking. Come to think of it, who needs a pedestrianised High Street. All that space wasted on 'walkers'.

Get rid of the whole lot, cut down the trees, rip out the seating, and face the truth....

Two legs, wrong.
Four wheels (so long as they're on a taxi) right. You know it makes sense.

Report this post »

More Tea Vicar says...
2:07pm Thu 21 Feb 13

TDH123 wrote:
Simply painting "Taxis" on the road does not necessarily mean that there is an enforceable parking restriction! Has nobody considered an appeal having regard to the regulatory requirements?
The problem is, the citizen who appeals faces the prospect of wasting a lot of time and money on a conflict which involves the council acting as the political wing of the taxi drivers' association, at your expense.

It's clear which side the Council is on, and we don't get a look in.

Report this post »

kateamuffin says...
3:24pm Thu 21 Feb 13

The writing on the road is not very clear especially at night. the other night i was unable to find a space along there due to a long row of taxis, i did stare at them quite rudely as i thought they had just parked up in spaces.
Only when i walked past i noticed the spray paint writing on the road.

Report this post »

Doogie 46 says...
4:49pm Thu 21 Feb 13

Er.. why exactly do we need so many taxis parked up in Melcheapen St, The Cross and Foregate St. There doesn`t seem to be the trade for them all during the day. Time we had a purge on illegal taxi parking - how many spaces do they want?
Give the disabled their spaces back - at least they`ll provide much needed business for the city centre.

Report this post »

MJI says...
4:50pm Thu 21 Feb 13

I also prefer shopping elsewhere.
.
Droitwich is OK and the petrol prices there pay for the trip

Report this post »

Lew Smoralz says...
6:07pm Thu 21 Feb 13

More Tea Vicar wrote:
Secret agent 46 wrote:
Why is it that worcester allow more spaces to taxi drivers and not people that are here to spend money.... Surely wouldn't it have been more sensible for the taxi to use the buss station and there fore freeing up spaces in town for parent/ child spaces....
How dare you question the City's taxi policy!! I feel we do not have enough taxis, and should actually have a few thousand more. I would actually demolish the Cathedral and Guildhall to make way for more taxi parking. Come to think of it, who needs a pedestrianised High Street. All that space wasted on 'walkers'.

Get rid of the whole lot, cut down the trees, rip out the seating, and face the truth....

Two legs, wrong.
Four wheels (so long as they're on a taxi) right. You know it makes sense.
You lily-hearted weakling!

Get to the real heart of the matter and stop ****-footing around.

Rip out the shops! Who needs shops any-more? They only get in the way of parked taxis.

What we need is to totally demolish the city shopping centre and start of with a taxi-rank based on St Pauls Square in the Vatican, where the council can come and worship their own taxi creation, and taxi drivers can relax properly without the inconvenience of unpleasant shoppers getting in their way.

If there is any spare space left around the edges, then maybe the Park-and-ride buses could be allocated some space, another failed council project that deserves remembrance and worship.

Finally, the rising bollards should be installed in the centre of the square, so that we can worship at the skill and ingenuity of our council masters. Needless to say, they don't have to be working - but they never did anyway!

Report this post »

Lew Smoralz says...
6:11pm Thu 21 Feb 13

I don't know why my last post deserved a **** censorship, I only referred to an cuddly, baby cat!

Report this post »

Maggie Would says...
8:46pm Thu 21 Feb 13

TDH123 wrote:
Simply painting "Taxis" on the road does not necessarily mean that there is an enforceable parking restriction! Has nobody considered an appeal having regard to the regulatory requirements?
My thoughts exactly.
Even the appeals body - ie Worcester City Council - admitted in the article above that the signage was inadequate as it was faded.

Report this post »

Maggie Would says...
8:47pm Thu 21 Feb 13

Lew Smoralz wrote:
I don't know why my last post deserved a **** censorship, I only referred to an cuddly, baby cat!
Snort! Fnar fnar!

Report this post »

luke4387 says...
10:25am Fri 22 Feb 13

I work directly infront of the parking bay and so many people have been fined for parking there. The signage is poor and residents of the city and visitors know the parking bay as an area of the public to park so regularly park there unknowingly!

No announcements in the local press or any signs in the area (both beforehand and ongoing) suggest that it is an area for taxi's only. From what I see, I find it hard to envisage how a taxi driver can afford to live - there are hundreds in city centre and they barely seem to have passengers. Outside my office, they are very loud and gather in groups with no custom but clogging up the area with their vehicles.

I know people who have been fined and their appeals have fallen on deaf ears. One person I saw was there dropping off an elderly lady and escorting her to another office and he got a parking fine - was literally about three minutes!!!

Report this post »

raq says...
5:46pm Fri 22 Feb 13

one94 wrote:
I would say there are good grounds to throw all of those fines out as the hashed lines are still white, which indicate parking bays. Regulaitons for taxi bays say they should be yellow.
.
http://www.ticketfig

hter.co.uk/signs.htm

#taxibay
one94, I've queried this with the Council today - I'll post the reply if I get one!

Report this post »

laidback says...
6:50am Sat 23 Feb 13

WCC is not the final appeal body. The appellant should proceed to the next step for independent adjudication.

Report this post »

raq says...
6:23pm Mon 25 Feb 13

Well, I've heard back from Worcester City Council who say that "the markings and signs conform entirely to that guidance found within the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002". They also say that "the signs at any given location inform the reasonably minded driver as to the nature of any existing parking restriction". So, either I'm not a reasonably minded driver, or the signage is inadequate - I do hope at least
that this article alerts others to the poor signage and stops them receiving a ticket!

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree