Couriers not stopping on single yellow line - is this common?

Always thought you could stop for loading on a single yellow?

It was delicious.

Glad the story ends well.

All the excuses come out when it’s the busiest time of the year and couriers are attempting the impossible.

If applied in a widespread manner surely it would break a number of business models.

if applied round here, even for double yellows it would massively improve the traffic flow!  Some of those business models could do with being broken!  I don’t have a problem with any driver deciding to follow the rules.  You are potentially right that there is a loading/unloading exemption but if you were on minimum wage, paying any tickets out your own pocket, and a load of turkeys to deliver before a deadline would you be taking the time to understand the kerb stripes as well as finding a space?

There's a lot of safety, traffic flow and more reasons why there are parking restrictions. It seems unreasonable to ignore them for convenience.

This is the same issue as electric car charging etc.

And yes, there's an assumption in business models that couriers can access legally and safely, and perhaps some places won't be able to take deliveries in future?

Everywhere can take deliveries. Couriers need to be paid for the pavement/stairs/pedestianarea they have to cross to get to the door. Kerbside drops aren’t always possible.

All the excuses come out when it’s the busiest time of the year and couriers are attempting the impossible.

We had one stop to ask directions a couple of days ago, which is common here, and reappear a minute later asking if we could take the package because our neighbour wasn't in. He was in, schedules...

There’s a lot of safety, traffic flow and more reasons why there are parking restrictions. It seems unreasonable to ignore them for convenience.

If such issues are imperative, make it a double yellow.

You can generally stop on single yellows to unload goods or people, "no stopping" is a different rule from "no parking/waiting." If stopping is prohibited completely then it will say so on the signage.

Even if there were parking restrictions, that sounds like a them problem - they've been paid to deliver it. They might not be able to park right outside your door, but that hardly seems like "unable to access the property".

And yes, there’s an assumption in business models that couriers can access legally and safely, and perhaps some places won’t be able to take deliveries in future?

Everywhere can take deliveries. Couriers need to be paid for the pavement/stairs/pedestianarea they have to cross to get to the door. Kerbside drops aren’t always possible.

“We” already treat highland and islands postcodes as if they are a problem and charge an additional fee.   Perhaps that should be the case for other difficult to access locations?  Perhaps if free delivery to your door was not the norm you might walk to the local shop (or a pick up point) helping the local economy and the environment!  Perhaps developers would think more carefully about delivery access to ensure that urban properties didn’t end up on the hit list.

If such issues are imperative, make it a double yellow.

no need - we have single yellow, with or without kerb stripes, double yellow, sign plates, double reds etc.  anyone using the roads is supposed to know the rules - if they don’t want to they can simply treat all as no stopping and they will never get a penalty.  We haven’t seen the lines or signs outside the OPs house nor do we know what time the delivery was.  He says he believes n loading is tolerated, but isn’t asking us to confirm that from the signage - he’s waiting to ask the council.  That seems to imply that a driver with no special knowledge relying on the signage would think it was not permitted at that time.

Obvious question from the OP - does he have off street parking? (Ie a driveway)

Maybe they couldn’t get stopped in your street or close enough to it, but no never heard of a company not stopping on a single yellow line. But, it could be it has times where there is no stopping allowed, that includes for drop off, we have limited information but glad the goose got it’s gander.

while I try to establish the full facts,

but I will wait until the New Year to contact the Council for their views

You got your turkey in time 🙂

Personally this is one I’d just shrug off and not think about again unless you have another issue but it’s interesting to see what some people spend time & effort following up.

(That’s not meant to sound snarky, it is interesting 🙂 )

I requested loading bays for deliveries when our parking scheme was being instituted by the local authority some years ago, on the basis that otherwise drivers have free rein to park anywhere. That feedback was ignored, and a Cambridgeshire traffic wardens once told me they are typically powerless to do anything about drivers on double yellows due to their exemptions for loading. My observation is that most tickets seem to be issued for illicit parking in residential parking scheme spaces, with a blind eye turned to double yellow, grass verge, and pavement parking around here.

I think delivery vehicles should be paying rates to the local authority to offset the destruction wrought on our streets and roads by the new commercial model. It would help to level the distortions slightly, and could help push them towards using EAPCs for urban final mile deliveries.

Turning this around, who would be happy paying any parking fine incurred by the driver delivering your goods?

The fact OP doesn’t know the restrictions themselves and driver probably on terrible wages with a crazy schedule probably suggests the answer.

EAPCs

E-bikes? Not sure how that would realistically look? The load capacity of a small van is massive compared to even the biggest cargo bikes.

The parking bays sound sensible though.

To be clear it was a goose not a turkey

Although that won’t effect parking rules

Even if there were parking restrictions, that sounds like a them problem – they’ve been paid to deliver it.

The problem is, they haven't been paid enough for anything but the easiest, most straightforward delivery. This is the consequence of race-to-the-bottom style courier pricing. And if it's your Chrimbo meat that doesn't get delivered on Xmas eve, it's most definitely a you problem. Why would the courier even give a shit?!

To be clear it was a goose not a turkey

Although that won’t effect parking rules

That would make me more likely to chase it down the street though.

And if it’s your Chrimbo meat that doesn’t get delivered on Xmas eve,

I’m quite disorganised but that is cutting it a bit too fine!

Round here it seems that putting your hazards on means you're allowed to stop wherever you like. Couriers in cars or massive LWB vans, taxis, whatever, just pop your hazards on and it's fine to stop for a few minutes whether it's on any number of yellow lines, corners, zigzag lines by crossings, you name it.

If such issues are imperative, make it a double yellow.

There is no functional difference between single and double yellows other than the times they apply, doubles aren't more "no, really don't park here" than singles are. Double yellows apply at all times, single yellows are backed up with signage explaining the restrictions.

The rules do seem very complicated...

I asked my local council to install a loading bay outside a row of shops near me. Private cars were blocking all the available road space outside the shops, and delivery vans etc were parking on the zigzags as a result. The council installed one a month later and it has (mostly) improved things. There's a problem now of idiots parking in the loading bay but it's a smaller problem than before...

It's always worth talking nicely to your local Highways Dept...

never heard of a company not stopping on a single yellow line.

We've got the opposite problem here. Disabled bays and double yellows on a blind bend and no-one gives a ****, doubly so when the chippie's open and the fat bastards can't be arsed to walk ten yards.

a blind eye turned to double yellow, grass verge, and pavement parking around here.

Point of note here is that pavement parking for regular vehicles isn't illegal (aside from a couple of cities where it's a local bylaw). It's only illegal for goods vehicles. So it may be that they aren't "turning a blind eye" so much as the drivers are legally, if inconveniently, parked.

There is an offence of obstructing the highway, but I've been through the legislation with my non-legal brain and as far as I can tell this applies to fixed structures and things like skips rather than readily-movable vehicles. It's really not clear though.

I asked my local council to install a loading bay outside a row of shops near me. Private cars were blocking all the available road space outside the shops, and delivery vans etc were parking on the zigzags as a result. The council installed one a month later and it has (mostly) improved things. There’s a problem now of idiots parking in the loading bay but it’s a smaller problem than before…

It’s always worth talking nicely to your local Highways Dept…

Username checks out 🙂

Couriers are allowed to stop on single yellow lines if the package they're delivering is large and/or heavy . If it is not large or heavy they have to stop elsewhere.

Personally  I am sick of being charged extra for deliveries as I live in Fort William and I have no complaints about the delivery drivers just about their unscrupulous employers

Sounds like a bit of a maverick courier. Perhaps him and your goose just fancied an unauthorised flyby?

The same level of parking restrictions apply to double and single yellows lines - except single yellows restrictions apply only during period stated on the signs - whereas double yellow applies all the time except where - exceptionally - there are times saying when it doesn't apply.  The rules on single yellows are not less strict.  The rules on this and what stopping is allowed on yellow lines is pretty clear in the highway code.. link below to relevant section

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/road-markings

Couriers are allowed to stop on single yellow lines if the package they’re delivering is large and/or heavy . If it is not large or heavy they have to stop elsewhere.

Nonsense.

As I posted above same rules apply to single and double - just that singles only apply during times indicated on signs

I live on double yellows and no-one in 10 years has had a problem stopping to deliver.

Loading (including couriers)  is allowed on them according to https://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/services/parking-services/loading-and-unloading

I would guess this is a driver employed by the supplier rather than a regular courier?

I can't imagine a scenario where they would have previously got tickets unless they have blocked a dropped kerb or parked on zigzags, or have taken more than 5 minutes to deliver i.e taking a sack barrow of multiple deliveries and taken too long to come back.

I bet most couriers would much prefer to stop on yellows than have to double park alongside full parking bays.

I can’t imagine a scenario where

The OP didn't talk to the driver, they spoke to a call centre. If I were a betting man, I'd hazard that the call handler was talking bollocks to cover for the fact that one of their drivers had just ****ed off without attempting delivery.

Sounds like a bit of a maverick courier. Perhaps him and your goose just fancied an unauthorised flyby?

This deserved more recognition.

- Cougar.

I can’t imagine a scenario where they would have previously got tickets unless they have blocked a dropped kerb or parked on zigzags, or have taken more than 5 minutes to deliver i.e taking a sack barrow of multiple deliveries and taken too long to come back.

When there is no unloading or unloading due to time constraints or not at any time.

To be clear it was a goose not a turkey ... That would make me more likely to chase it down the street though.

Wildly, obviously.

When there is no unloading or unloading due to time constraints or not at any time.

Op didn't mention any signs displaying such stipulations.nor vertical lines drawn on the kerb

Some of you have your red lines and yellow lines mixed up.

"There is an offence of obstructing the highway, but I’ve been through the legislation with my non-legal brain and as far as I can tell this applies to fixed structures and things like skips rather than readily-movable vehicles."

It applies to vehicles.

"103.  No person in charge of a motor vehicle or trailer shall cause or permit the vehicle to stand on a road so as to cause any unnecessary obstruction of the road. "

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1986/1078/regulation/103

It used to be the case (and may still be) that this was a police only enforcement. No parking wardens. It includes blocking pavements and could cover double parking.  I would hazard a guess that this is pretty low down on the priorities for police forces. I have seen it used but a delivery driver would be astoundingly unlucky to be caught.   99.9% of the time if the police did anything it would be to tell him to park elsewhere.

Point of note here is that pavement parking for regular vehicles isn’t illegal (aside from a couple of cities where it’s a local bylaw).

In England

Op didn’t mention any signs displaying such stipulations.nor vertical lines drawn on the kerb

They didn’t mention much and I was talking about the possible reason why they may have got one in the past.

Then there’s this.

The road is inded a single yellow line and the parking restrictions did apply during those hours,

Drivers for low cost couriers don't like industrial estates. We've had several deliveries reordered not in when thew orkshop is manned all day. They gey close enough for the tracker to register they've arrived, take a photos of the nearest unit and drive off.

Then there’s this.

Indeed. Nothing about not loading or unloading. Just parking.

Anything else would be inferred rather than given  by the op

In <em style="box-sizing: border-box; --tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246/0.5); --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; color: #000000; font-family: Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, 'Noto Sans', sans-serif, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; background-color: #eeeeee;">England

But is a dick move world wide.

Like I said it’s not clear.

Single yellow lines - no waiting during the displayed times

Double yellow line - no waiting at any time

Single yellow stripe up and over face of kerb - no loading during displayed times

Double yellow stripe up and over face of kerb - no loading at any time

Single red line - no stopping during the displayed times

Double red line - no stopping at any time

So if your line is yellow and you have no stripes up and over the face of the kerb then stopping for loading/unloading is permitted

It applies to vehicles.

“103. No person in charge of a motor vehicle or trailer shall cause or permit the vehicle to stand on a road so as to cause any unnecessary obstruction of the road.”

By that letter of that rule, it could be argued street parking is blanket illegal.

How do we define "unnecessary obstruction" and how does that relate to pavements? "It was necessary to obstruct the footpath Your Honour, otherwise I'd have been blocking the highway and my chips were getting cold."

I've read that before (the last time this conversation cropped up on STW). I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think it's particularly clear.

In England

Well, yes, good point. It's illegal in London and Scotland, but I don't live in either of those places along with many other countries and I have no idea where the OP is so I was going with what I knew.

Wibble gets it.

Others are trying to be correct by technicality.

First large paragraph of text states loading/unloading permitted on yellow lines unless loading restrictions (yellow stripes up on over kerb) or no stopping (red lines) are present

https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/road-markings.html

But is a dick move world wide.

Whilst this may be true (I'm not exactly sure what you're replying to with the forum mangling, sorry), "being a dick" is sadly not an endorsable offence.

Pavement parking

And it's wholly endorsable with judicial use of a pram or wheelchair.

It may not be an offence most places for a vehicle to be parked on the pavement, it is illegal to drive on the pavement. So unless cars are being lifted into place on the pavement, the act of parking them is illegal.

edit; the Highway Code states that as a must rule (ie enforced by law, but I’m not convinced the referenced legislation has that effect).

I thought couriers just did what the **** they like, when they like, where they like, how they like?

I thought couriers just did what the **** they like, when they like, where they like, how they like?

The op's courier did .... He thought he was getting goose for din dins on Xmas day !

Others are trying to be correct by technicality.

Given its a detached house I guess it depends on how enthusiastically the area is patrolled. If a few of them have been hit with fines even if they win on appeal they might think its not worth the hassle.

On my cul-de-sac we have a residents scheme, thanks to some moron uni students, and we get frequent visits from the wardens. Front gardens are basically non-existent and I have seen a warden have a quick look up and down to see if it looks like a courier, at which point they lose interest, or not.  If it was harder to check I suspect a fair few would end up with tickets.

Wibble gets it.

Others are trying to be correct by technicality.

Wibble has said what many others have said, it’s why there would be reason they’ve previously getting a ticket.

"How do we define “unnecessary obstruction” and how does that relate to pavements?"

Pavement alongside a road is part of the road for most laws.  Define? If it isn't an emergency and the pavement  is completely blocked that is unnecessary. Likewise double parking to save walking 50 yards from a kerbside space. I used to do this stuff for a living. Don't believe me?

"It is an offence to obstruct a pavement, contrary to Regulation 103 of The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986."

http://www.pedestriansafety.org.uk/pavement_parking_q_a.html

When leith walk opened fully again after the tram works I kept on finding delivery vans parking on double red lines - but to get out of the way of the trams they mounted the pavement and blocked the cycleway.  I asked a warden about this and they told me they had be told to go easy on delivery drivers.  I made a formal complaint to the council.  Whether my complaint made any difference I do not know but the policy was changed a few months later and now ( presumably after a few tickets) it no longer happens - so certainly there delivery drivers do not illegally park any more.

Wibble has said what many others have said, it’s why there would be reason they’ve previously getting a ticket.

Only if you don't read all what wobble wrote. But then I guess if we are making up what the parking. Restriction sign might say in our head.... Anything is on.

Just to deal with a few points that have been raised:

There are no kerb stripes

The notices just give times, nothing else and the "delivery" aka drive-by was within those times.

The choice of delivery day was the supplier's, not mine.

We have a driveway, the entrance is the same width it was in the 1930s when the house was built so although you can reverse a van into it, expecting a courier to do so would be unreasonable.

I spoke on the phone to the delivery manager for this region, not some call centre bod.  Who rang the driver, who I then spoke to to arrange to meet up with him.  That part at least was very good, except for the fact that it shouldn't have been necessary at all.

There is some history with the Council, the sixth form college across the road*, the bus company**, local residents and the yellow lines (now on both sides of the road).  I recall the draft TRO which we had sight of actually mentioning deliveries and tradespeeps, hence my interest in the details - there has been neotiation with the Council over this and maybe things could be tweaked.

Related to the above, there is no parking on the kerb, with cute little notices to that effect.  This is not the same as parking on the pavement as the road has those patches of grass between the kerb and the pavement.  All twee and suburban like.

*The cause of the yellow lines was students/parents/taxis parking and waiting in the road, which is a bus route, also the school busses having to use it to gain access to park further up, (still a yellow line) to wait there until chucking out time.  The school appointed traffic marshalls, but to no avail.  We thought it all just added to life's rich tapestry, but some of our neighbours felt that getting stuck in your house for 15 mins by gridlocked traffic was unacceptable.  Obviously, they had a point.

**As did the bus company, after one particularly bad afternoon gridlock a bus driver totally lost it, the bus company (Council owned} cancelled the route and hey presto, a yellow line appeared on our side of the road, to go with the one on the other side.

There seems to be a considerable amount of discussion about parking on pavements, blocking of traffic by parking at the edge of the carriageway or blocking of traffic by double parking.

I would assume as the op has stated there are single yellow lines that double parking is not a problem with the scenario that he encountered.

The op hasn't stated (edit seems my typing is too slow) if loading/unloading on the single yellow line would cause significant disruption to traffic, i.e. if the road is narrow, on a bend, by a junction or what the traffic count was at the time of the delivery. The op also hasn't seemingly mentioned parking on the pavement, or whether this would be necessary to avoid blocking the carriageway during loading/unloading (. Until that time it's all a bit moot.

We could also talk about the quality of parking at school drop off and collection times, or the parking of home removals vehicles..?

We could also discuss about the placement of vehicle trailers on single or double yellow lines, which the law does not consider to be parking or loading/unloading and which is perfectly legal as they do not have engines so are not classified as motor vehicles?

Only if you don’t read all what wobble wrote. But then I guess if we are making up what the parking. Restriction sign might say in our head…. Anything is on.

ironic.

The road markings should match the TRO, TTRO or ETRO so sight of the wording should not be required to know what restrictions there are. Reading Borough Council, for instance, recently discovered this and is having to offer refunds as a result.

It may not be an offence most places for a vehicle to be parked on the pavement, it is illegal to drive on the pavement. So unless cars are being lifted into place on the pavement, the act of parking them is illegal.

Is clipping the kerb when parking up classed as "driving on the pavement"? What if I pushed my car up onto the kerb? How about motorbikes, I used to routinely cross the pavement without a dropped kerb to shove mine up the garden path.

Define? If it isn’t an emergency and the pavement is completely blocked that is unnecessary.

How about partially blocked? The RAC (after a brief google) recommends parking partially on the pavement if the alternative would be to restrict passage on the road.

Likewise double parking to save walking 50 yards from a kerbside space. I used to do this stuff for a living.

What stuff did you do? Which law mandates against double parking, that's a new one on me.

I'm not defending any of this behaviour, I'm just saying that it's not clear. And it isn't. If it was then London / Scotland wouldn't have needed to bring in a bylaw explicitly prohibiting it. The law wouldn't expressly single out 7.5T+ vehicles as being not allowed to park on the footway if it applied to everyone.

On the street at my old house everyone used to park half-on the street except me because I objected to it on principle; after my third or fourth hit-and-run write-off I started parking up on the kerb like everyone else.

Point of note here is that pavement parking for regular vehicles isn’t illegal (aside from a couple of cities where it’s a local bylaw)

In addition to minus' post,

Highway Code Rule 145
You MUST NOT drive on or over a pavement, footpath or bridleway except to gain lawful access to property, or in the case of an emergency.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Will4/5-6/50/section/72

Lawful access is about driving across the pavement to get onto a driveway, rather than abandoning the vehicle and walking 🙂

The road markings should match the TRO, TTRO or ETRO so sight of the wording should not be required to know what restrictions there are. Reading Borough Council, for instance, recently discovered this and is having to offer refunds as a result.

Well clearly not exactly.  Only when interpreted according to , presumably, some piece of actual legislation affecting councils that has not so far been referenced on this thread.

Anyone got any ideas where to look for this stuff?

Anyone got any ideas where to look for this stuff?

TROs are usually held by the county council or equivalent; their legal department gets them at Court. Some publish them online and some don't, e.g. https://www.westsussex.gov.uk/roads-and-travel/traffic-regulation-orders/about-tros/view-tro-restrictions-by-map/traffic-regulation-order-tro-map/

How do we define “unnecessary obstruction” and how does that relate to pavements? “It was necessary to obstruct the footpath Your Honour, otherwise I’d have been blocking the highway and my chips were getting cold.”

"We" don't. The driver either pleads guilty or not guilty at which point a Court decides based on the situation at the time. Same for double-parking, etc.

Pushing a car could be "driving", although in the particular circumstances of R v MacDonagh (1974), it wasn't. https://vlex.co.uk/vid/r-v-macdonagh-792563369

McKoen v Ellis (1986) pushing a motorbike by the handlebars was driving if the ignition is on and the biker is wearing a helmet and other clothing

Is clipping the kerb when parking up classed as “driving on the pavement”?

That's classed as incompetent 🙂

TROs are usually held by the county council or equivalent; their legal department gets them at Court. Some publish them online and some don’t, e.g

Thanks @timba.  Mine doesn't, well not all of them.  But that is not what I was after, I am wondering where the language of yellow lines, notices etc. is defined.  It must be done centrally somehow so there is consistency across councils.

The sign wording is here https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/traffic-signs-manual (Chapter 3)

I don't know where the legal templates are (if they exist) to put before a Court. There's a short legal section at the beginning of the chapter, but try your Local Authority solicitor

From Chapter 3^^ (page 144), is this it?

13.4.2. Standard exemptions to a waiting prohibition are not shown on the signs. These exemptions include stopping to pick up or set down passengers, and causing a vehicle to be stationary for the purposes of loading or unloading goods from that vehicle. Loading generally refers to commercial loading or to objects that are too heavy or bulky to be carried very far by hand, but does not include time for purchasing the goods. Where loading is not permitted, this is indicated on the upright sign. Loading restriction signs have a white background, to contrast with the yellow “no waiting” signs

Beat me to it @timba, thanks for the link.

“We” don’t. The driver either pleads guilty or not guilty at which point a Court decides based on the situation at the time. Same for double-parking, etc.

Precisely. If it were clear then it would be fixed penalty not a summons. Has it ever been tested in court or is this discussion all theoretical?

(I realise now that I was misunderstanding what people were referring to as double parking - I thought you meant both sides of the road.)

That’s classed as incompetent

😀 Well, again, that's not illegal either unfortunately.

If it were clear then it would be fixed penalty not a summons.

They are FPNs. Unnecessary obstruction, Wilful obstruction (different Acts) and Ride/Drive a vehicle on a footpath; all are DVLA code NE98 (non-endorsable). Accept the FPN ("guilty") or opt to go to Court

Has it ever been tested in court or is this discussion all theoretical?

Wilful obstruction has been tested many times since 1828 and includes things like shop keepers displaying goods on the pavement

Unnecessary obstruction is a Con and Use offence

Case examples: Solomon v Durbridge (1956), Nagy v Weston (1965), Evans v Barker (1971)

In his judgment Lord Glidewell L.J. cited the judgment of Lord Parker C.J. in Nagy v. Weston (1965) 1 All E.R. 78, 80 in which Lord Parker said:

 "It is undoubtedly true--counsel for the appellant is quite right - that there must be proof that the user in question was an unreasonable use. Whether or not the user amounting to an obstruction is or is not an unreasonable use of the highway is a question of fact. It depends on all the circumstances, including the length of time the obstruction continues, the place where it occurs, the purpose for which it is done, and, of course, whether it does in fact cause an actual obstruction as opposed to a potential obstruction."

Unnecessary obstruction is a Con and Use offence

Sorry, I don't know what that means?

Sorry, I don’t know what that means?

Apologies are all mine.

Unnecessary obstruction

The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 section 103. No person in charge of a motor vehicle or trailer shall cause or permit the vehicle to stand on a road so as to cause any unnecessary obstruction of the road. (Con and Use Regs go back decades, this is the current version)

Wilful obstruction

Town Police Clauses Act 1847, Section 28. Every person who in any street, to the obstruction, annoyance, or danger of the residents or passengers, commits any of the following offences, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale for each offence, or, in the discretion of the justice before whom he is convicted, may be committed to prison, there to remain for a period not exceeding fourteen days...

...or who, by obstructing the street, wilfully prevents any person or carriage from passing him, or any waggon, cart, or carriage under his care

How about partially blocked? The RAC (after a brief google) recommends parking partially on the pavement if the alternative would be to restrict passage on the road.

On this particular road, not far from where I live, it’s very clear that you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t; the plod don’t give a damn, ‘cos the alternative will piss off everyone.

I thought couriers just did what the **** they like, when they like, where they like, how they like?

This time of year is a nightmare. Regular drivers get to know the area, know who's usually in, where to leave stuff if they're not and where to park to quickly drop 3-4 deliveries in one go.

Black Friday / Christmas means the courier companies employ all manner of extra staff who don't always know the area, hey're under pressure to fulfil a ridiculous number of drops... I had a crate of wine go missing (replaced by Virgin Wines) and then the other day got a photo of an Amazon package left on my doorstep, the courier having ignored all the info about leaving it with a neighbour. They often just stop, chuck the package at the door then bugger off again.

cos the alternative will piss off everyone.

You mean piss off other car drivers so you choose instead to piss of those with mobility impairments, children, and everyone who wants to use the pavement.

So I worked as a delivery driver during COVID. Minimum wage, stressful and a large percentage of people you delivered to were incredibly rude. I parked wherever the **** I could and gave zero shits about it.....take it up with the company/people that buy endless shite online was my stance.

You mean piss off other car drivers so you choose instead to piss of those with mobility impairments, children, and everyone who wants to use the pavement.

Exactly.

The obvious solution is to use a means of travel which is cheaper, healthier, uses less space etc.

I wonder what type of vehicle could do that?

Has it ever been tested in court or is this discussion all theoretical?

Commercial Motor magazine "know the law" 24th September 1971, Page 61

An important case from the road transport industry point of view is that of Vanderpant v Mayfair Hotel Co 1930, where it was held that the right of the occupier of premises abutting a highway to make use of it for obtaining access to his premises and for loading and unloading goods is subject to the right of the public to Use the highway. In other words occupation of premises does not give an unrestricted right to use the road outside. A vehicle left on the footpath and one on a grass verge are both standing on a "road" for the purpose of this regulation. https://archive.commercialmotor.com/article/24th-september-1971/61/know-the-law