What to do if someone parks on your drive - and it's not call police
The law around parking on private driveways can be a grey area and many homeowners may not know their rights
One might assume that a quick call to the police or local council would swiftly deal with an unwelcome car parked on your driveway, but it's not that simple. Rule 243 of the Highway Code lists various no-go zones for parking, such as near school entrances, bus stops, within ten metres of a junction and spots that block emergency services.
Yet, when it comes to private driveways, the issue is considered trespassing - a civil matter - leaving both police and council powerless to remove the vehicle from your property.
In such a predicament, homeowners must resist the urge to move the car themselves to avoid potential charges of vandalism.
The recommended course of action involves a calm chat with the vehicle owner, but if the nuisance persists, legal steps may be necessary.
To sidestep these troubles, homeowners can use removable bollards, traffic cones, or expandable barriers to block access when they're out.
Installing clear "No Parking" or "Private Driveway" signs, gates, or surveillance cameras can also help keep those pesky unauthorised parkers at bay.
However, some savvy homeowners are cashing in by renting out their driveways. A recent survey has shown that nearly one in four Brits are either already hiring out their driveway space or mulling over the idea to rake in some extra cash, particularly when they're located near hotspots like stadiums, arenas and bustling city centres where parking is at a premium during major events.
The trend is catching on big time among football fans, with residents near stadiums making a tidy sum by offering up their driveways for supporters' cars on match days.
LeaseLoco.com's CEO John Wilmot said: "Many homeowners are shocked to find out that a stranger parking in their driveway is not actually a criminal offence, despite it being a clear violation of personal space.
"This legal grey area can be frustrating, especially if you live in a busy area where it happens regularly, so it's important to take steps to prevent unwanted parking in the first place.
"While the most effective way to protect your property is installing a driveway gate, putting out simple deterrents like parking bollards or posts, cones and signs can also help to prevent strangers from parking in your driveway.
"On the flip side, if you live near venues or in busy areas, this situation can be turned into an opportunity, as you could allow other motorists to park in your driveway - on your own terms.
"Renting out your driveway when you're not using it is becoming increasingly popular and can be a great way to earn some extra income.
"If you do find yourself in a situation where you come home and see a stranger parking on your property, remember to never take matters into your own hands, or it can land you in serious trouble. Start off with a calm conversation, and if the issues persist, you may need to take legal action."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
an hour ago
- Scottish Sun
Sham parking firms fail to return 20 cars to Brit holidaymakers leaving them stranded at major UK airport
Some of the cars were left undrivable PARK AND HIDE Sham parking firms fail to return 20 cars to Brit holidaymakers leaving them stranded at major UK airport BRIT holidaymakers were left marooned at an airport after finding their cars missing. They left their motors with rogue parking firms who failed to return them. Advertisement 3 Bristol Airport terminal Credit: Alamy 3 One of the cars seized during the operation targeting unofficial parking companies near Bristol Airport Credit: SWNS Homebound Brits were left stranded upon their arrival back in the UK at Bristol Airport, after 20 cars failed to be returned to their owners. Police have launched a crackdown operation against these unofficial 'companies' after receiving numerous complaints. The reports to the police detailed vehicles sustaining damage and unaccounted extra miles on the clock. The airport's policing team collaborated with the Immigration Enforcement Team, North Somerset Council and the Motor Insurance Bureau during an enforcement day on June 3. Advertisement The forces discovered 20 vehicles which had not been returned to their rightful owners. Consequently, many were left marooned at Bristol Airport for hours waiting for their cars to be recovered before they could get back home. Some of those unable to leave the airport were families with young children. The officer in the case supporting the operation, Sgt Danielle Hardaway said: "The last thing anyone wants is the worry over whether their car will be returned to them or not when they return from holiday. Advertisement "This operation was carried out as part of our commitment to keep the airport safe, maintain vehicle standards, and to promote the safety of passengers going to and from the airport, who should be able to do so with confidence in using licensed vehicles. "We have had reports of cars being returned damaged or with excess mileage and, in some cases, have been driven by people who are uninsured as well as being involved in driving offences." The cars have now been returned to their owners by the police. However many of them were found to be in undrivable or unroadworthy conditions. Advertisement Avon and Somerset police even reported that some cars had been left in hazardous or obstructive places around nearby villages - such that they required towing. The police have issued a photo which shows one customer's car being used to distribute keys around the local areas. In the picture, keys are piled on the front seat and in the footwell, which poses a threat risk. Following the operation, investigations are underway into three unlicensed 'taxis' and other suspected offences including no insurance, immigration, and licensing issues. Advertisement Dave Lees, Chief Executive, Bristol Airport, said: "We welcome this latest operation and will continue to work with colleagues at Avon and Somerset Police and North Somerset Council to tackle these rogue operators. "They are a nuisance to local communities and cause distress to customers who use them – with many completely unaware of where their cars end up. "We urge everyone to look for the Park Mark accreditation, which all of our car parks have, so they have the peace of mind knowing their vehicle is safely parked while they enjoy their trip away. "We also ask our customers to be respectful of our neighbours and not to park or drop off outside their houses or drop litter." Advertisement Sgt Hardaway also offered some guidance to holidaymakers to avoid this happening in future: "We are now in the summer months and therefore a busy holiday season for both travellers and Bristol Airport alike. "We ask people to always choose reputable parking operators, and to choose them carefully, and if the price seems too good to be true, then it often is." "We advise people, when booking parking anywhere, to look for the British Parking Association's police-backed Park Mark Safer Parking scheme." 3 Photo from police showing keys piled on the front seat Credit: SWNS
Daily Mirror
2 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Five weird banned ads as Twix ordered to pull 'dangerous driving' advert
An advert for Twix has been banned by the Advertising Standards Agency, which ruled it encourages dangerous driving - but it isn't the first advert to fall foul of the watchdog's rules A new advert for chocolate bar Twix has been banned, with the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) ordering it be pulled from air in its current form. The advert saw a man take part in a car chase and then ended up in a crash, while eating a Twix, of course. It left a car that looks exactly the same as his own caramel-coloured vehicle on top of his; with the two cars sandwiched together, it's reminiscent of the chocolate bar itself. The advertising watchdog has ruled that the advert encouraged "dangerous driving" and operating a car in a way "that appeared likely to breach the legal requirements of the Highway Code" - after receiving five complaints about its content. Mars-Wrigley, which owns Twix as well as a litany of other sweet treats like Maltesers, objected to the ban and defended its advert, explaining that it isn't meant to be realistic. The advert was a "cinematic presentation" and took place in a " world that was absurd, fantastical and removed from reality", it said. Clearcast - the organisation which gave the all-clear to adverts before they appear on television - agreed, telling the ASA that in its view, it was obvious no one was meant to copy the kind of driving that was featured in the advert. However, the ASA said that certain aspects of the advert meant it had to be changed, like "visible skid marks" on the road and the "emphasis on speed" telling Mars "not to condone or encourage irresponsible driving that was likely to breach the legal requirements of the Highway Code in their ads". Twix is by no means the only company to fall foul of the ASA's rules in recent years - The Mirror looks back at five major adverts that have been banned for breaking the rules. Tesco Mobile Tesco was ordered to pull a series of advertisements back in 2022, for a cheeky campaign that made reference to swearwords - without actually swearing. Reading, "What a load of shiitake," "For fettuccine's sake", and "They're taking the pistachio" the adverts may have been intended as playful, but they received 52 complaints. People weren't happy, on the basis that they had been placed where children could see them so they were not appropriate, and the ASA banned the campaign, though Tesco Mobile defended itself by pointing out they had at no point actually used swearwords. Rimmel Make-up company Rimmel fell foul of the ASA with an online 'Back to School' advert it released that was eventually deemed inappropriate for young people, and sexist. "Get ready to slay this back-to-school season. Get 25% off Multi-Tasker Concealer and other Rimmel faves…" the advert read, and featured imagery of an influencer applying their make up. The ASA banned the advert on the basis that it "implied that girls or young women were more likely to succeed or do well when they went back to school if they wore make-up, in this case a concealing and contouring product". Rimmel acknowledged it was a back to school advert, but denied that it was trying to imply children must apply make-up to attend school, or do well academically. Calvin Klein In 2024, fashion powerhouse Calvin Klein had an advert featuring singer FKA Twigs banned for "objectifying women". Calvin Klein adverts have been known to feature a decent amount of skin for a long time, and the iconic tag line "Nothing comes between me and my Calvins" has gone down as one of the all-time advertising success stories. However, this advert was a bridge too far for the ASA, showing the popstar wearing a denim shirt that had half-fallen off her body, showing one side of her bum and half her breast. Two people complained about the advert calling it "overly sexualised" and claiming it was offensive, and the ASA pulled the plug on it. Calvin Klein strongly denied the advert was objectifying, saying that it produced similar ads to this one before, and that the singer was a "confident and empowered woman" who actively collaborated with the brand and was happy with the image before it was released, per The Standard. Wahed Wahed, an online investment company, was ordered to pull a series of poster ads from the London transport network earlier this year. The ASA received more than 70 complaints about the adverts - which saw banknotes set on fire, including dollars featuring the words the 'United States of America' - from people claiming it "offensive" per The Guardian. The posters had been featured on buses and the London Underground - and part of the ASA's reasoning for banning them was their placement, arguing that tourists from the Eurozone and the US would have been likely to see them, and possibly be offended. Wahed said in defence of its adverts that they were not criticising a particular group of people, and that its campaign aimed to promote a type of investment that is in line with Islamic teachings, including that interest should not be charged on loans. The ASA said, "Although we acknowledged Wahed Invest's view that they had not directly criticised a specific group, and that depictions of burning banknotes were commonly encountered, we considered the burning of banknotes would have caused serious offence to some viewers." Pretty Little Thing The ASA has very strict rules about any adverts that are sexualising or suggestive using underage girls. Clothing retailer Pretty Little Thing fell foul of the watchdog when it used then-16-year-old Alabama Barker in a campaign on its website, wearing clothes that were revealing and formfitting. "Channel that teen dream realness with barely-there micro mini skirts," the images were captioned, and altogether the ASA found the pictures to be "sexually suggestive" and banned the lot.
Scottish Sun
3 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
Twix ad BANNED from TV after being branded ‘dangerous'
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) AN ad for chocolate bar Twix that was branded 'dangerous' has been BANNED from TV. The advertisement depicts a car chase between two identical caramel coloured vehicles - ending with one sandwiched on the other like a Twix. Sign up for the Entertainment newsletter Sign up 4 A Twix advert has been banned after being branded "dangerous" Credit: Getty 4 A watchdog said the ad "must not appear again in its current form." Credit: BBC 4 The advert featured two caramel coloured cars sandwiched together Credit: TWIX However, five complaints have been made against the clip, saying that it highlighted dangerous driving and was irresponsible. Mars-Wrigley, who own the Twix brand, highlighted that the advert featured a "cinematic presentation". They continued by saying it took place in a "world that was absurd, fantastical and removed from reality" This view was echoed by Clearcast, the non-governmental organisation that approves adverts prior to broadcast. Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) ruled the ad "condoned unsafe driving" and "must not appear again" in its current iteration. Although the ASA acknowledged the fantastical aspect of the ad, it stated the video's first half showed driving "that appeared likely to breach the legal requirements of the Highway Code". The watchdog said there was an "emphasis on speed", in addition to "fast paced beat and music" in the car chase and "visible skid marks" left on the road. Mars defended the advert, having said both cars were shot "driving at lawful speeds and any emulation would only reflect the legal and safe driving presented." The final scene showed a Twix bar falling through the sunroofs of the two still attached cars. This was also accompanied by the tagline "two is more than one". Original '90s TV ad for N64 game Super Mario 64 now worth thousands Clearcast told the ASA that the advert's style made it clear that it was not meant to be emulated, nor did it suggest "safe driving was boring". The ASA's ruling concluded: "We told Mars Wrigley Confectionery UK Ltd not to condone or encourage irresponsible driving that was likely to breach the legal requirements of the Highway Code in their ads." It's not the first time that a TV ad has been banned from screens. TV architect George Clarke was paid by Scottish Power to star in their television advert. It was taken off air by the Advertising Standards Agency for breaching their guidlines. The watchdog said it misled viewers into thinking they were watching George's Channel 4 hit Amazing Spaces.
