‘A clear majority of drivers agree’
Changes to pavement parking are coming in the UK(Image: Getty)
Local authorities throughout England are set to gain enhanced powers to tackle motorists who cause obstruction by parking on pavements — a move that seemingly has widespread public backing.
In January, the UK Government announced the powers would come into force later in 2026, enabling councils across England to impose restrictions on particular roads and enforce penalties against those who breach them.
The English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, which provides these powers, was granted royal assent on 29 April. While the government has confirmed it will introduce the secondary legislation necessary for enforcement “in due course”, no precise timeline has been set, leaving uncertainty over when – or indeed if – local authorities will utilise them. London and Scotland already have blanket bans on pavement parking in place.
According to a policy document released in January, the government’s consultation on measures to help local authorities address pavement parking in England attracted more than 15,000 responses, with an overwhelming majority of individuals (81 per cent) and organisations (96 per cent) identifying pavement parking as an issue in their locality.
The consultation outlined three proposals, with the introduction of a nationwide ban on pavement parking (allowing for local exemptions) getting the strongest backing. The RAC reported that its own polling revealed a “clear majority” of motorists in favour of prohibiting pavement parking. A survey of 1,709 UK drivers carried out in September found that 83% were calling for fresh regulations to be brought in.
An overwhelming majority of people identify pavement parking as an issue(Image: Angel Santana via Getty Images)
In the government policy paper released in January, the transport department announced that councils would be granted fresh powers to issue penalties to those causing “unnecessary obstruction” while parking on pavements, reports the Mirror.
Lilian Greenwood MP, minister for local transport, said: “Pavement parking is an issue that resonates deeply with communities across our country. From bustling city centres to quiet residential streets, the impact is felt by many, particularly people living with sight-loss, mobility or sensory disabilities, older adults, parents with young children and anyone who relies on safe, accessible pavements to move around independently.
“The government is committed to building safer, more inclusive streets… Pavement parking undermines safety and restricts mobility.
“The government is taking forward a new, devolved approach to pavement parking, reflecting our commitment to decisions being made closer to the communities they affect. Local leaders know their communities best, so they are in the strongest position to figure out how to meet local needs effectively.”
She explained that “rather than introducing a ‘one size fits all’ national prohibition, which was one of the consultation options, we will enable local transport authorities to prohibit pavement parking in their areas at the next legislative opportunity”.
She continued: “In the meantime, we will be enabling local authorities to enforce against unnecessary obstruction of the pavement.”
‘Pavement parking is an issue that resonates deeply with communities across our country’ said an MP(Image: Alan Morris via Getty Images)
At present, police officers have the power to issue fines to those causing obstruction or positioning their vehicle dangerously, while council enforcement officers can only penalise pavement parkers who violate on-road regulations such as double yellow lines.
Erik Matthies from the RNIB, an organisation campaigning for a nationwide ban, stated that vehicles left on pavements remain “still the biggest barrier that blind and partially sighted people face when trying to walk alone”. He warned: “Pavement parking forces blind and partially sighted people into the road and potentially into the path of moving vehicles they can’t see. This is stressful and highly dangerous for both pedestrians and drivers and causes wider issues for wheelchair users, guide dog owners and parents with prams.
“It’s disappointing that the UK Government’s recent proposal only permits English councils to decide for themselves whether or how pavement parking could be restricted. This can only lead to a patchwork of provision, leaving drivers and pedestrians unsure of what to expect, which is a particular issue for blind and partially sighted pedestrians who rely on consistency in their environment to allow them to get around safely.”
RAC spokesman Rod Dennis highlighted that the motoring organisation’s own findings revealed “a clear majority of drivers agree that no pavement user should be made to walk or wheel into the road because of someone else’s inconsiderate parking”.
Mr Dennis added: “The Government’s outline proposals should clear the way for councils to prevent pavement parking where it causes problems, but permit drivers to partially park on pavements where doing so helps keep traffic flowing and doesn’t inconvenience other people.”
Jack Cousens, head of roads policy at The AA, urged caution over sweeping prohibitions, stating: “Drivers who park in an antisocial manner that blocks the path of pedestrians and wheelchair users and stops people from using tactile paving should be penalised. However, in the vast majority of cases, drivers are trying to balance safe access for pedestrians as well as allowing traffic to move along the road. [We] would recommend councils considering implementing a ban on pavement parking to carry out a street-by-street assessment. An outright ban could have a knock-on effect of displacing parking problems to new areas, causing new concerns of residents.”
A Department for Transport spokesperson commented: “Pavement parking can make it harder for people to get around safely – especially disabled people, older people and parents with pushchairs. That’s why we’re giving local leaders the powers to tackle problem pavement parking in their communities, with flexibility for exemptions where needed.”