Cabinet Office

55. Extension of powers to remove vehicles from land

  1. Section 99 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (removal of vehicles illegally, obstructively or dangerously parked, or abandoned or broken down) is amended as follows.
  2. In subsection (1) -
    1. in paragraph (a), after “road” insert “or other land”,
    2. in paragraph (b) -
      1. after “road”, where it appears for the first time, insert “or other land”, and
      2. after “road”, where it appears for the second time, insert “or land concerned”,
    3. in paragraph (c) for “, or on any land in the open air,” substitute “or other land”, and
    4. at the end insert “or other land”.
  3. In subsection (2) -
    1. in paragraph (a), after “road”, where it appears for the third time, insert “or on land other than a road”, and
    2. after paragraph (a), insert -
      “(aa) may provide, in the case of a vehicle which may be removed from land other than a road, for the moving of the vehicle from one position on such land to another position on such land or on any road

The Public Reading Stage was open for comments for three weeks from 15 February to 7 March 2011 and has now closed. Your suggestions will be considered by Parliamentarians as the Bill passes through the House of Commons. Thank you for your suggestions.

3 Responses to 55. Extension of powers to remove vehicles from land

  1. Mr M.E.J. Wright says:

    This clause has potential discriminatory cosequences.
    In particular it will be used to extend the Powers of Harrasment aimed at the community of ‘travelers’ who are forced to occupy local authority land simply because said local authority has failed in its statutory duty to provide adequate and acceptable ‘official’ sites.
    It will enable local authorities to remove vehicles etc from land in public ownership and in so doing place them on the Public Highway whereby the police will be enabled to lay charges of both ‘obstruction’ and any related breach of ‘vehicle construction and use regulations’. Such actions are clearly aimed at penalising the vehicle owner / keeper of said vehicles. This would particularly apply to ‘travelers’ where local authorities have failed to provide adequate and acceptable sites for said travelers.
    Under such circumstances all authorities must be required to provide alternative and suitable sites for all such travelers, their vehicles and other posessions and accept full responsibility for the safe transportation and associated costs of such transfer.
    Also any such ‘eviction’ of vehicles can only be enacted where access to the land is required for imediate re-use of said land. It must also be made clear that ‘fencing off’ or similar ‘prevention of access’ works do not represent ‘imediate re-use’.
    This on going harasment of the traveler community must stop, and no legislation is to be used for the purpose of such harasment.

  2. The Notes state that these powers will apply to the police, local authorities and “others.” It is not clear who these others might be- in particular, whether private landowners would be able to take advantage of these powers as a partial substitute for the loss of the power of clamping. All the same, s.99 RTA only relates to vehicles causing an obstruction, so mere unpermitted occupation of land would still not be covered and the landowner would have to rely on his/her common law right of distress damage feasant.

  3. Neil Macehiter says:

    It appears to me that the purpose of this subsection is to extend the regulations for removal of vehicles from public roads to ‘other’ land. What is the rationale for this extension? Would these regulations apply even if the owner of that ‘other’ land. For example, if a private land owner allows vehicles to be present for the purposes of a demonstration would it be possible for those vehicles to be removed irrespective of the wishes of the land owner.

    Does this give land owners to request the removal of vehicles e.g. in lieu of clamping?