UKC

**Reposting in redacted form with moderator permission**

This is just a heads up to anybody who sleeps in a van in the Hathersage area.

Last night I was parked at the lay-by on the bend in the road leaving Hathersage, just after the Scotsman's Pack, on the way to Stanage. It's a big spot with space for several vans, and there is no sign saying you can't stop overnight, or anything like that. I've used it many times in the past.

Long story short: last night a pair of very drunk locals (man and woman in their 60s) started attacking my van with a dog lead. When I got out and demanded to know what was going on, they became extremely aggressive and verbally abusive saying they didn't want "people like me" around there, and (falsely) claiming I needed landowner's permission to park where I was. I called the police, who sent a car, but after 30 minutes it still hadn't arrived, and they called me back to say it might be at least another 30 minutes. As the damage to the van didn't seem as severe as I first thought, and because the situation was not de-escalating, the police officers advised me to simply drive away. Before I could do so, the man punched me in the face - not very hard (it was rather a pathetic effort), but enough to shock me, and it took all I had not to retaliate physically, and leave. 

I drove off and spent half the night awake, with my head in a spin and adrenaline pumping through me. Today has been pretty unpleasant processing what happened.

So I'd strongly advise people to avoid sleeping in vans in this area, and consider this a PSA accordingly.

Please don't start speculating below as to the identity of the couple involved. This was why the original thread was removed. I'm re-posting because I really don't want anyone else to go through what I went through last night - but we don't need vigilante justice. The police are aware so let's leave it to them.

In reply to Paul Sagar:

PSA?

In reply to Jon Read:

Public Service Announcement 

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Ah! Thanks. I just got Prostate-Specific Antigen Test, but likely reflects what google thinks I should be looking at.

In reply to Jon Read:

hahaha no, I don't want to be giving people one of THOSE PSAs!

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Hopefully you saw my earlier post, but in the interests of reducing the likelihood of this happening again (to anyone), maybe van sleepovers should be BEYOND areas where people might be walking home from the pub (if I remember that road correctly, I think your unpleasant experience was before the end of the housing up that road).

Just had a quick look at Google maps, seems my memory is wrong and you were beyond nearly all the housing - in which case the Police's work will hopefully be less onerous.

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Hmm, seems like the most appropriate response would have been to punch him back and nick his wallet to pay for any damage to the van.

In reply to Michael Hood:

Yes, I was a bit further along. As you say, police’s job not very difficult in this case (not least as he was yelling his name at me as I was on the phone to them…)

In reply to Michael Hood:

But yes in general from now on I’ll be aiming to sleep completely outside of residential areas to try and avoid any such incidents in the future. 

In reply to henwardian:

Well not really because then it would be me sitting in a cell, having potentially screwed up my life.

I’ve spent the day trying to avoid indulging in revenge fantasies. As tempting as they are, those are the kinds of emotions I nearly let get the better of me last night - and I have spent the past 24 hours wondering how close I came to making a bad situation a truly life-changingly awful one. 
 

it was pretty close, and that has scared me. 

In reply to Paul Sagar:

I saw your earlier post. I’m glad it wasn’t worse, it sounded terrible and I hope the cops find and prosecute the couple.

 Going by your profile pic you don’t look like a weakling or a pushover but it could easily have been a single woman or someone with their child in the van. Another issue with driving away for me anyway is that I’d be likely to have had a couple of drinks and possibly be over the limit.

 

In reply to 65:

Yes, for a single woman it would have been utterly terrifying. for me it wasn’t so bad once I sized up the pair as I was fairly confident they couldn’t really hurt me. But it has made me quite worried about a similar scenario where it’s eg two 40-something 6ft 2 blokes. 
 

And yeah very lucky i hadn’t had a drink, not just because I could drive away legally but because if i had been boozing I’m sure it would have gotten much uglier 

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Horrible experience, and sounds like you dealt with it really well so even though you’re shaken today take comfort that you rose above it and did the right thing.

And you’re right, retaliating could have big consequences - drunk people lose all those protective reflexes and even a simple push can result in a potentially life threatening injury. Hope you’re feeling ok! 

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Yeah, I wasn't being serious (about the wallet part at least).

Why? Nothing wrong with a few revenge fantasies as long as you only spend a day or a week thinking about them and then cast them aside when they've served their psychological purpose.

Also, I'd be very surprised if you were arrested if you had punched him back, even the most cursory police observations would take in 1) You are not the intoxicated one, 2) As you had originally been inside your van, the altercation had almost certainly been started by them and not by you, 3) There is physical evidence your van was damaged by them and 4) In a he said/he said situation, there isn't enough evidence for any kind of charge of assault even if they did try to lie about it and paint you as the aggressor when the boys in blue arrived.

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Wrote a reply earlier but the thread was pulled...

Van use has exploded in the area particularly post lockdown and that lay-by is often empty when there are 10-30 vans most weekends further up the hill around stanage. However I have noticed an increase in use recently of this lay-by for a few obviously reasons: close to pub, reasonably flat and less prone to winds that buffer vans parked in the popular hill top location. There was actually a van there this morning which had either arrived after you left or was just stopped briefly. It looked like someone was bushing the dirt from thier van onto the floor when I drove past however I was just passing so couldn't be sure of exactly what they were doing.

The lay-by is pretty close to the houses nearby where i believe the people you described live as I regularly see a couple matching your description walking thier dog up the road in the mornings. Any extra noise, rubbish or toilet waste from other vans or anyone else could have caused you to be unfortunately be on the receiving end of some disgusting behaviour which is not justified by any grievances they have about the lay-by use. I wouldn't discount the land being private as is unlikely to be an official lay-by.

I'd parking away from the houses in future or in similar fashion to TobyA's kind offer in the original thread come park on our drive next time, I owe you a beer for the Spanish quickdraw incident and upsetting you on the thread about old tat anyway

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Not a nice experience but maybe you should have parked at a campsite? 

In reply to PaulJepson:

Victim blaming is very unhelpful.

In reply to PaulJepson:

Might have avoided the actual incident but the problem with van overnighting is that there is a significant proportion who don't do it responsibly. There's no suggestion that the OP is amongst that proportion.

In reply to Michael Hood:

There is a view that Van Sleepers are a Tragedy of the Commons situation, and that not camping on a campsite or at a hut is freeloading.

In this view the OP has acted irresponsibly.

This is a situation that could be approaching a tipping point on our crowded isle. The car park at the Stickle Barn in Langdale apparently had 70 vans one night last year, in the peak lay byes are full of vans and in Wales they are very visible.

It would be interesting if the OP could explain why they do not use a campsite or park at a club hut. 

In reply to Godwin:

It's a valid subject, but I don't think this thread is the appropriate place for you to ask people to explain their actions.

In reply to Ridge:

So where is?

The Van Sleepers are seen by some as a problem, and possibly the residents of the areas we use for our pastime, are getting frustrated. In this case this frustration has boiled over. 

If one steps into the shoes of a resident for a brief moment, the thought of the weekend and particularly a BH weekend, could be viewed with dread. I can only see this getting worse if park authorities start taking more action to prevent feral van camping, they will push vans into the Villages. 

 

In reply to Godwin:

On a thread which isn't about someone warning others about having been the victim of violence yesterday. 

This sounds like you are justifying violence. At best, explaining violence. 

I'm local-ish, about 10 minutes away. And from my shoes you look like an insensitive and entitled plonker.  

Do you tell women to change how they dress and not too drink too much so that men are less likely to assault them? If so, how does that go down?

In reply to Godwin:

It would be interesting to hear why you think they should.

If a camper parks safely, not on private property, doesn't litter or toilet (not even grey water), moves off in the morning, then absolutely no one has been impacted by their presence. 

In reply to TobyA:

Possibly the thread could be construed that people could consider being less selfish, and pay a few quid to park their van, as it is all getting out of hand, and local residents are getting cheesed of.

Not justifying violence, but the crucial question is always why has something happened, so I am just trying to understand an alternate perspective.

10 minutes away means living in Sheffield, at a guess. Possibly one solution would be if Sheffield climbers did as you have do and operate a warm showers kind of thing, and then the feral campers could park at their houses.

Are you happy with all the vans parked in The Peak and elsewhere, and more to the point, do you have a van, are you in fact part of the problem.

I shall ignore that silly comment.

In reply to Paul Sagar: i think you have been assaulted and the police need to do made to do something .  As it happens I have sone sympathy for people who are sick of van lifers as an old family friend in the south peak is sick to death of clearing up their faecal waste where they walk their dog but that doesn’t mean they sholud  go punching people . You did the right thing by not reacting to the punch even though you would have been justified , as has been said the chap may have gone done like a sack of spuds and died . Even if the truth has come out you would have had months even years of worry before it was put to bed  . Please follow it up with the police . 

In reply to ExiledScot:

Because, when a few people had vans, they passed generally unnoticed, but now, there are just too many, like I said, it is a Tragedy of the Commons.

I was walking down from Gaitkins last year, and at the top of the Wrynose, someone had parked their Pop Top VW in an idyllic location looking out over one of the best views in the Lake District. I am sure it would look ace on Instagram. The problem was that they had taken a Public good and made it a Private Good, and spoiled that view for everyone else. Travel over the Blea Tarn Road, every flat area has Van parked in it, and it spoils it. Same with The Peak, that lay-by at the back of Stanage is snided out with vans, and more than once I have seen camp fires. It spoils it for other peoples.

So, to repeat, when it was just one or three, no one cared, because no one noticed, it was stealthy, but now, IMO, it has got out of hand.

Your turn now. Why should they (you) not park at a hut, campsite or TobyA's

In reply to Godwin:

Someone didn't get cheesed off they attacked someone. 

You are. And are doing it again in this post 

Well, you're wrong. 

Why's that "to the point"? Again you seem to be existing in a world presumptive entitlement. If you want to discuss van use in national parks start another threads. 

Presumably because you can't think of a good answer to it. Let's try again - if a woman reported being assaulted when on a night out and needing to call the police, would that be an appropriate time for you to suggest she dress less attractively and not drink (whilst knowing next to nothing about actual situation)? I really hope that you wouldn't, but maybe you would.

Just start another thread and discuss away. It's really very simple to show just a little bit of human sympathy and tact.

In reply to Godwin:

The problem here is drunk tossers assaulting people and reactionary UKCers making excuses for their actions. See ExiledScot's comment above: what, exactly, has someone who has parked legally and not left any rubbish done to deserve to be attacked? Toby's last comment isn't silly, it's a fair comparison to your position.

I don’t mind answering the question. 

As it happens, it was a slightly odd choice for me to stop there as the rest of my club was at Thorpe Farm Bunkhouse and I’d popped in to have dinner there (having joined the meet late). I moved to this spot because I wanted to be on my own, because my ex was also climbing with the club that weekend and it’s a recent break up and it just felt more comfortable to me if I didn’t spend too much time in the vicinity. Also, I hadn’t paid for the bunkhouse so it felt better to go down the road. 

i can see why people would see what I was doing as free-loading. But now people know the context, perhaps it becomes more understandable? I do appreciate a bit more, however, why locals may be getting more and more fed up with irresponsible van over-nighters. 
 

having recently joined the CC my new policy is I will stay in CC hut car parks when available and stick a few quid in the honesty box for the toilet etc. I often do stay on campsites eg when my club is stopping at one, where I pay as others do. 
 

none of the above changes the fact that what happened to me on Sunday night was both illegal and unacceptable, and also frankly that the two people involved were just really not very nice and I don’t think it’s wise to make them the spokespeople for legitimate local grievances about poor behaviour from van users 

In reply to Graeme Hammond:

Haha you’ll have to refresh my memory about both incidents! (I presume the tat thing was some absurd forum argument we can safely forget about but I’m intrigued by the QuickDraw tale?!)

In reply to ExiledScot:

While the OP may not have done anything wrong on paper and had minimal impact, it's easy to see why people get cheesed off (and I'm in no way justifying their actions in this case- they sound like absolute pondlife). People overnighting in vans cheeses me off, and I live in a city. If I'd spent god knows how much on living in the Peak District then I'd likely be cheesed off with them to an extra-mature level. It's a wider issue which I think needs a law change from the top, especially when it comes to within the borders of national parks.

That being said, a random assault in the night is not a nice experience and I hope the perpetrators are dealt with.

I do think there is a wider question which needs to be asked on vanlifing. For instance in the OPs case, this isn't Jerry Moffat dossing in a barn in a cotton sleeping bag with maybe a handful of others in between claiming a pittance. Theres an argument that there should be an expectation for someone who has the means (lives in London and judging by the number of bolt-clipping holidays that seem to be in the logbook, can financially afford the burden) of paying their lodgings for the night. Of course the criminals in this instance were not to know that (unless it's a particularly flashy van).

It's a wider issue but if anyone who does not vanlife themself would like to disagree with me, then I'm all ears. Any time someone brings up vanlifing as a negative they seem to get taken down by posters who partake in the lifestyle.

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Possibly a few years ago when vans where less common, that would be a valid choice, but now, with so many vans, on a Bank Holiday weekend, perhaps not as wise a choice as a campsite

Excellent, thats the ticket.

I am not justifying the behaviour of your assailant, and it sounds awful, I would hope when they woke up, Police or no Police they feel thoroughly ashamed of their unacceptable behaviour, but I suspect that they reinforce each others opinions, so probably not.

In reply to Paul Sagar:

You don't need to justify where you decide to park to idiots on here. If you're parked legally, you're not making any noise and you're not leaving any rubbish then there is no issue.

Hathersage was absolutely heaving yesterday with a constant stream of traffic pouring through and you could taste the pollution in the air. There's been a big increase in visitors over the last few years and with it an increase in anti-social behaviour from a minority, eg littering and crapping in laybys. People with vans are getting the blame for all of it from incomers who've bought expensive houses and and regular visitors who don't want to believe that they themselves are part of the problem.

In reply to PaulJepson:

I think you make fair points and indeed I’m going to make more of an effort to pay for my stays from now on. Sometimes it’s not possible (long drive having to stop late; being somewhere remote) but I agree there is a problem and I’d rather be part of the solution going forward 

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Good response. I do not do Likes and Dislikes, but take a like from me.

 

In reply to PaulJepson:

Really? My impression is rather different - lots of us have, at least since 2020, been commenting on how many vans there are and, particularly, how big vans seem to take up lots of potential parking space in the hills.  I've noted here in past years some real knobber behaviour from van owners I've seen in the Peak. It's come up regularly at Peak area BMC meetings as well as a problem. 

But like I said to the other chap, just start another thread. 

In reply to Paul Sagar:

If you park up overnight outside a CC hut you are still expected to pay the normal nightly rate. The honesty box is for brief day time use of hut facilities 

In reply to TobyA:

I don't think that's entirely fair.  Excessive van parking is a genuine problem that needs dealing with (not by fights, to be clear). Women dressing as they choose isn't a problem.

In reply to cem:

Ok thanks - I needed to email the hut sec and ask for confirmation on this so good to know!

In reply to MG:

From my perspective excessive vehicle use is the problem and complaining about vans just looks like deflection by car drivers.

In reply to pancakeandchips:

Excessive vehicle use is a problem, but van use also brings extra problems as suggested, such as monopolising parking spaces, annoying locals, monopolising of views etc.

It would be helpful in understanding your perspective, to know if you are a Van Sleeper or not, and if so, are you a feral van dosser. Then one could understand if you are trying to deflect the conversation.

I would hope the the Police are as assiduous in investigating the OPs complaint as PC Toby, the UKC thread police man is, as I am sure he will be along shortly, Nick Nick (ᗒ ᗨᗕ)

In reply to MG:

Of course it's a problem - but this isn't (or at least wasn't) a thread about the problems of vans parking illegally or even merely annoyingly. Paul had his van vandalised and then was a victim of a (fortunately not very competent) violent assault. He was warning people about where this had happened. 

Derek's original post basically said it was Paul's fault, using the word irresponsible - although in the passive voice, of course, to allow himself some wiggle room when inevitably someone (Ridge at first) said that's victim blaming. Derek went on to say Paul should stop being selfish. This is 36 hours after he had to call 999 because he was being attacked. 

There is a time and a place for all discussions, but like I said a bit of tact and empathy would have been good here.

In reply to pancakeandchips:

Popular End parking early afternoon Saturday below. I had wanted to climb Saturday but regular partners weren't available. I decided having noted how bad the parking had got a couple of weekends ago - and when of course my car was part of the problem - that this weekend I'd cycle. Hard work! And made harder if you take much gear, but I was just soloing, so doable. But as I was climbing below the causeway I could cycle right there, it only took me about twice as long to get there as it would driving round, finding somewhere to park and walking up to the cliffs.

In reply to Godwin:

I've got a smallish van which is my only vehicle, as I've said before last time this regular conversation came up on ukc. I use it for work and I occasionally sleep in it, usually in campsites but on occasion in laybys. Does this make me a vanlifer? Or a feral van dosser? If so am I disqualified from having an opinion?

Usually when I go into the peak (I live in Sheffield) I use the bus because it's easy, cheap and I don't have to worry about finding somewhere to park.

Do you have a car? Do you ever park at, eg, North Lees or on the side of the road?

In reply to pancakeandchips:

It's possible there is more than one problem in the world!

In reply to pancakeandchips:

I have a Van, with a very very comfortable bed in the back, and a porta potty, which I park at huts usually and sometimes campsites. I also doss at the ODG, because its free, and saves me walking down Langdale, but I think I should review this. I have also dossed on NT car parks, because its free, in the past, but shall do no more.
But I am on record as saying I will desist from flying, but sadly I have just booked a flight to the Dolomites, so yes guilty as charged, a self justifying hypocrite. There is a lot of it around you know.

In reply to pancakeandchips:

Parking legally is not the same as parking considerately. Parking up near people's homes is bound to piss them off . You may be a responsible camper for whom the stop is a one-off and who makes no noise and leaves no rubbish, to them you are just one of a constant stream of visitors, not all of whom will be as well behaved. It is an issue for them (which of course does not excuse violent behaviour).

There has been an explosion in van use in the last few years, with social media encouraging fly-camping.  Whereas a few years ago it wasn't a significant problem, now it is. Parking up near people's homes upsets the residents, parking in more wild areas upsets other users who are also seeking remoteness.  You might still be able to get away with fly-camping in the more remote and less frequented areas of Scotland and perhaps Wales, but in the Lakes and Peak it is no longer realistic to think you can do so considerately, especially when both areas are well-endowed with proper campsites. I say this with regret, but I believe that is now unfortunately the reality.

In reply to Howard J:

I think the real issue here is why people these days seem to "park up" rather than just "park" like I do. Is there a difference? Am I doing it wrong?

In reply to MG:

Absolutely! But people tend to conflate multiple different issues when they're complaining about vans in the peak district:

• Parking availability
• Visual impact
• Rubbish/crap
• Pollution
• Roads being blocked
   

That's not an exhaustive list by any means and I'm sure PaulJepson can list some more problems. To have a proper conversation about it we'd need to disentangle the issues and treat them separately to see which criticisms are valid and to work out what solutions would be fair. When a whole group of people are demonised as vanlifers etc and blamed for all of these issues you end up with situations like above with pissed idiots attacking people because they've whipped themselves up into a rage.

In reply to Howard J:

I think you are, sadly, right about that now. I’ll be changing how I stay in those places accordingly from now on. 

In reply to Howard J:

Agreed, parking legally is not the same as parking considerately, although they are linked. Residents of national parks have been having a tough time over the last few years because of the increase in visitors - however, NPs are national. They've been designated as such for everyone in the country to enjoy and there are obviously huge problems with the availability of parking and also the quality and frequency of public transport into the peak.

In reply to Howard J:

Summed up perfectly. 

It's a problem which will only be getting worse. It's convenient, flexible, and attractive. Something that paid accommodation often is not as much. Pre-covid it appealed to me very much and I had to think long and hard about whether I'd get a van. It's a bit daft now.

The longer they put off legislation, the more people will be screwed over and left with a dream they cant live when they ultimately do. 

Things can be put in place in honey pots (see ban on wildcamping and fires around Loch Lomond) and overnighting in vehicles in national parks needs addressing. 

In reply to Howard J:

What do you mean by "fly-camping"? I don't think it's how I understand the term from seeing it used by the NT, LDNP and others over the last 3 years. 

Fly camping is a portmanteau of fly-tipping and camping - i.e. the scumbags who just dump or leave cheap tents and gear and all their rubbish after a night or two, you shouldn't be able to get away with it anywhere but it seems to still be happening in many places. 

If you mean 'wild camping', even if just off the road next to your vehicle, it's legal in Scotland except in the controlled area around Loch Lomond and the Trossachs. 

And if you mean people sleeping in vans in lay-bys at least around me in the Peak it seems to be happening almost every night at all times of the year. I haven't been up Mam Tor recently but I believe there is still the semi official parking place for vans up by the cavern entrance (Blue John?) that the council had to arrange for COVID. Last time I parked early at the bottom of the Broken Road there were lots of camper vans there, with curtains closed presumably they had been there overnight.

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Yes. I think you did well not to escalate the situation. I do have opinions on 'van life' but I think they are irrelevant on this thread, we all end up in situations that aren't 'ideal', and sometimes that has a knock on effect and before you know it you're 'neck high in shit'. Sounds like you avoided that, I'm chuffed for you.

In reply to TobyA:

I'm not sure sleeping in a van in a layby can be considered wild camping. There are rules for wild camping to minimise impact (such as being so far from the trail/road, out of sight, zero trace etc.) so van dossing doesn't qualify. And is a major part of the problem tbh. 

In reply to PaulJepson:

I'm not saying it's wild camping, more trying to see what Howard thinks fly camping is.

Beyond best practice there are no "rules" for wild camping because it's trespass in England and Wales without the landowners permission. From my reading of the Scottish outdoor access code, there are just rules for camping - not wild camping. From memory there's nothing about distance from road etc. I think it is heavily influenced by the Nordic nations' traditions of Everyman's Right, which generally say not in any ones garden or fields with crops in, otherwise camp away. 

And, in Scotland, someone sleeping in their van in a lay-by is likely to have less impact than me parking my car in the lay-by and then pitching my tent on the (hopefully flattish and grassy) ground just beyond the lay-by surely?

In reply to Godwin:

Feral van dosser...?? 

In reply to abr1966:

I think he won the stage into Luz Ardiden in the 1983 Tour de France.

In reply to abr1966:

I thought that was an interesting turn of phrase for Derek to use considering he later said he has a van that he sleeps in, including in NT car parks. I noted a couple of summers ago arriving early at a NT carpark in Langdale, lots of vans with curtains closed, despite the plentiful signage saying "no overnight parking". Perhaps Derek was slumbering away, dreaming of who he could castigate next online, in one of those very vans! ;⁠-⁠)

In reply to TobyA:

I like the idea of Derek stuck in a long queue of campervans and motorhomes trundling along behind a selfish cyclist.

In reply to abr1966:

Do you like that, rather poetic, I bet Chat Bots are years away from dreaming up shite like that.

In reply to PaulJepson and uncle Derek 

The risk is rolling everyone who has a van into one group. The person in a layby outside a village clearly isn't the same as those on the hardknott/wrynose view point. Etc..  there is low impact overnighting and highly visible where yes they do impact. A simple local council rule banning over night camping at key viewpoint would solve this, but no one should be assaulted for being in a lay-by outside Hathersage. 

Campfires at stanage, I'll wager climbers and boulderers have started far more than van lifers. 

In reply to Jon Read:

Did you pass?

In reply to ExiledScot:

A problem is that the person in the van has no real way of assessing the impact. What appears a quiet lay-by one day, could have had several vans there the previous day, and could be a running sore locally.

I have not said anyone should be assaulted for being in a lay-by, nor do I think anyone else has, I have just suggested that there could be an ongoing problem, which lay at the back of the incident.

Vehicle parking can be contentious though. We shall be off to Europe cycling for 6 weeks and catching a ferry from Hull. One option is parking my van near Hull for 6 weeks, possibly 10 or more miles from the port and cycling in. Now I am pretty sure if I parked it on a  road with no parking restrictions, it would piss people off, but really, there is no reason why I should not, other than my own fear of vandalism. Just too many vehicles I suppose.

In reply to Godwin:

No you didn't, but you did say the assault had probably been the result of people getting "cheesed off" and Paul should be "less selfish" and should not be "irresponsible" in order to not get assaulted presumably?

In reply to Godwin:

Doesn't the Stickle Barn allow and charge for it?

In reply to TobyA:

Understanding why something happened is not the same as justifying it. 

To be clear, I wouldn't wish what happened to Paul on many people outside of the current government but I can understand why it did, and I share some of the concerns which probably ultimately lead to it. 

Unfortunately someone sleeping in a van in the peak district is, to the outside, just as much one of the bad ones as they are one of the good ones. Schrodinger's van.

In reply to PaulJepson:

Hmmm I really do want to emphasise how nasty the people involved were. I think they were looking for any excuse to be aggressive and 'outsider in a van' was an excuse as much as a cause. I doubt very much they attend local council meetings to offer input as to how to improve the local community, address problems with tourism, and so forth...

I drive a Custom Tourneo which is classed as a car, so presumably I'm ok then?

Been 'van' dossing for 35 years and never left anything but tyre marks.

Parking overnight has less impact than parking during the day.  It is dark at night and the locals are in bed......

I've had two similar experiences to the OP. but in very remote places.......not good.

In reply to Godwin:

I think we should build some road side parking for vehicles, maybe 50-100m long, tarmaced, rubbish bin, maybe a little grass verge separating them from the main road, a special P sign to mark them, some could even have boards with local town or village. Problem solved, a parking spot.  

In reply to Godwin:

This is exactly the same attitude used by landowners to justify banning ramblers and by some ramblers to disapprove of climbers or mountain bikers on bridleways. It's NIMBYism from people who think they have more right to the countryside than other people and that their preferred way of enjoying the country is more valid because people have been doing it for longer.

The laybys where the vans are parked are next to roads and usually full of vehicles from people out walking or climbing anyway. The fact that more of these vehicles are now vans makes almost no difference to the visual impact of the layby.

Littering and human waste is a different matter but I haven't seen much evidence that this is common. I suspect people with an axe to grind about van camping might attribute any and all litter they see to van campers when this may not be the case.

For what it's worth I do not own a van and have never slept in one.

In reply to PaulJepson:

Sure and I think your posts, whilst critical, didn't have the scolding tone that the other chap's did. That tone seemed even more mean spirited and just plain ridiculous when he later said that he owned a van and slept in free car parks in it.

I think you said that (like me, FWIW) you don't own a van?

I've got a friend who has a VW camper that I suspect isn't any bigger in footprint than my car is. When he uses that and parks it I don't think it's any worse than me doing the same with my car to go climbing. But some of the converted commercial vans are massive and take considerably more space than a car does. Some like that regularly seem to be in place in the hard standing roadside parking up at the top below Stanage Apparent North. This is just a personal opinion but I find them more of an eyesore than cars parked there. Going past you get that slightly intimidating feeling of going past ranks of police transits at public order events. I've even seen two big vans there parked end to end, but leaving enough space in between for the owners to sit out around with a brazier burning despite the summer fire ban. I've also seen on a good few occasions now big vans like that have been parked in the Horseshoe parking, they definitely make it harder to turn around at the end and sometimes stop other vehicles from fitting through to use spaces at the end.

But I still don't think it's either nice or helpful to tell someone, who was recently a victim of a violent crime, why what he had done led to him getting punched. That's what UD's immediate reaction was.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

The Stickle Barn itself, has very little parking, what I am referring to is the NT Car Park next to the Stickle Barn.
The NT has always tolerated overnight parking, and people have joined the NT for the parking, but possibly a couple of years ago they started trying to charge £10 for overnight parking or van camping, which was loosely enforced, some people would just keep quiet, when the warden came a knocking (has never happened to me).
However the latest I have heard is that because the NT was then deemed to be operating a campsite on the car park, by virtue of charging for camping, it was decided they would need to apply for planning permission to operate a campsite, which they did not wish to do.
So it is back to no overnight camping, but I am not sure about overnight parking, say if you wish to go on a multi day walk.

Thats how I have understood the situation, but other people may have more informed knowledge.

As to the Stickle Barn Itself, last I knew it was up for lease as the NT did not wish to operate it any longer. I suppose a quick google could discover its current status.

In reply to pancakeandchips:

Have they?  Really?

https://www.nationalparks.uk/what-is-a-national-park/

Funded by central government, National Parks have specific purposes that are enshrined in law.  In England and Wales they are:

• Conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage.
• Promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of national parks by the public.

"Understanding and enjoyment".  Part of that understanding is recognising the way their preserved character limits parking for cars and camper vans etc.

In reply to pancakeandchips:

I once went in the Man City end at a game wearing a Manchester United shirt ….

In reply to TobyA:

Ah, classic UKC, you are going to keep repeating I am victim blaming, I could keep saying I was not, but you will never change your opinion of what I posted. 
Anyway I have got my tasks for the day done so shall go for a walk, and leave you with it.

In reply to dunc56:

I once watched Liverpool in the away end at West Ham. The bloke next to me clocked that I was supporting the wrong team. That was kind of a hairy situation...luckily I kept my big mouth shut on that occasion and just mumbled that I only wanted to watch the game sorry didn't mean any harm. The chap informed me that I was "lucky the lads behind me didn't know or they'd have filled you in"...but at the end we shook hands and I said I hoped they stayed up. Which was a lie, I f***ing hate West Ham.

In reply to TobyA:

"Fly camping" was originally synonymous with "wild camping". I'd deliberately avoided the term "wild camping" because to me (and I think to most UKCers) this means remote camping in a small tent or bivvy well away from roads and other people.  I don't think parking a van next to a road counts as "wild camping", despite the efforts of some on social media to make it sound more exciting and adventurous.

However it does appear that this term is now conflated with leaving rubbish and other anti-social behaviour. I had not intended to imply that that the OP might be guilty of this, and indeed my comments were about responsible and considerate van camping. 

It seems to me that the sheer weight of numbers now makes even responsible van life all but impossible in some parts of the country.  Irresponsible users only make this worse. This is very regrettable for those who have done this for years without causing conflict, but times change and when a once niche activity becomes widely popular this can often give rise to pressures which had previously been manageable.  We are seeing much the same with the increased numbers of climbers and walkers. putting pressure on some places, and with the sudden popularity of "wild" swimming.

In reply to Paul Sagar:

I think this is the right thing to do anyway.  No excuse for attacking people, but other than the obvious trace of there being a van there my view on the use of campers is that wild camping principles should apply (well away from homes and businesses, park late, leave early, no noise, no litter/toilet waste etc), and camping too close to homes fails on that.

I'm sure you do do that, but some don't and cause issues.

In reply to Neil Williams:

Indeed - though to be clear, the spot I was in on Sunday is past the houses in Hathersage, and I thought it was very much not within the village. I arrived late, made no noise and would have been gone by 7.30am leaving no trace. However, tensions on this issue clearly now run so high I think it's best to try as much as possible to stick to campsites and authorised parking (i.e. where you've paid) in the Peak from now on.

In reply to TobyA:

You can't solve issues without explaining them.  Stuff like terrorism is a prime example - the root issues have to be dealt with or all you end up doing is playing a game of security one upmanship.

In reply to Paul Sagar:

I think I know where you mean, thinking on, and am surprised it was an issue there.

The way for the UK to solve the problem properly is probably to provide basic sites to stay at with little more than a tap and a toilet emptying point at a sort of price that's similar to simple overnight car parking.

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Ha ha looks like you’ve run out of lives . Check all your gear before you next climb. 

In reply to Paul Sagar:

If you had been over the limit, and the police had turned up, you would have been exposed to a fairly serious risk of finding yourself nicked for being 'drunk in charge'.  (Pretty much an absolute certainty following any kind of a fracas I should think.) 

It's a very bad idea to be over the limit while sleeping in a vehicle at the side of the road, even though you have no intention of driving it whilst still under the influence.

In reply to Howard J:

Not particularly surprising really, given that another thing that apparently exploded in popularity during the pandemic was fly tipping.

In reply to deepsoup:

Yep, something I only found out was the case yesterday. Somewhat amusingly, one of the things the very pissed couple kept accusing me of was being drunk with my keys in the van...I kept trying to explain to them that I hadn't touched a drop, which given their own state of total inebriation, they flatly refused to believe was possible!

If anything, though, finding out that it's actually indeed a very bad idea (from a legal PoV) to be drunk in your van even if you don't intend to drive it is one of the small silver linings for me. I've massively reduced my alcohol consumption in the past year spontaneously as a result of eating better, and this is just another incentive to not bother boozing at all.

In reply to dunc56:

You say that, but I tried to climb on Monday morning (bad idea), opting for Curbar trad (even worse idea!) and my head was all over the place. I ended up falling off the VS I was warming up on! Luckily I'd placed 3 bomber cams so there was no drama. But yes, maybe I should stick to fishing for a while...

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Having no intention to drive until sober is a defense against "being drunk in charge".

Not sure how effective it would have been but I always ensured that I did not have my keys on my person when I was a pissed youth kipping in my car. I struggle to believe you would get convicted for being asleep in a sleeping bag in the back of a camper whilst parked up.

I don't doubt that an over zealous officer might try it on you though. 

In reply to Howard J:

I've camped all my life (I'll be 50 this year) and have "wild camped" with mates (although we didn't know the term then, and often referred to it as bivvying) since my mid teens, so late 80s. I worked in climbing and camping shops as a student, and have camped far more on climbing trips around the world than I have stayed in huts or hostels. I regularly wild camp, and have done a lot of non-wild but non-campsite camping over the years - dossing in car parks for example. That's just the context to saying I had never heard the term fly-camping until 2020 and the National Trust using it to complain about people dumping all their cheap gear after camping out without permission. I remember here, as well as across the media it was a huge point of discussion that summer and less so subsequently. e.g.

https://inews.co.uk/news/national-trust-fly-camping-lockdown-restrictions-r...

https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/visit/lake-district/wild-camping-in-the-la...

https://www.countryfile.com/wildlife/wildlife-stories/rise-in-fly-camping-a...

Googling now, all the references to fly camping as wild camping seem to be from southern Africa often using it along with the term "bush". I've never been to southern Africa so that might account for my never having heard the term used pre-2020, but I suspect that would be the same for most British people? Is that where you heard the term?

Short of the police going around and ticketing people doing it (and I'm not sure what legal basis that would be on, I suspect in many cases there isn't one), I don't see why or how it could stop - that's my impression from around me in the Peak. But it seems many many people find it still perfectly possible!

In reply to Brown:

I'm sure it's fine 99% of the time, but if the police had turned up and I'd laid the guy out AND I was over the limit with my keys in the vehicle...wouldn't have looked good for me.

But really, for me this is just a good incentive not to even have "just one", because it always seems that "just one" somehow turns into "four", and I now get such terrible hangovers that it really ruins the next day for me!

In reply to Paul Sagar:

You made the right decision in the circumstances, and unless you or a companion were under immediate threat justifying self defence, violent action is best left to fantasies. Enough people have been killed either directly or indirectly from single punches that the short term satisfaction is not worth the risk.

In reply to Paul Sagar:

I was going to ask if it was Pale Complexion (VS 4c) but there aren't 3 bomber cams on it, so can't have been! It is though ridiculously hard for the grade - I've only ever failed on it, so by that impeccable logic, it has to be harder than the Curbar HVSs that I've onsighted!

In reply to Brown:

Not at all effective.  Pissed youths often take risks they're not fully aware of, most of the time they're lucky enough to get away with it and I reckon your experience is an example of that.

Someone I used to work with was not so lucky and got a 12 month ban and a big fine.  To save time and spare the expense of a hotel he'd driven from one job directly to another without going home, parked in a corner of the car park of the place he was working the following day, had a few drinks in the pub over the road and settled down to kip in his car. 

He went to court and argued (completely truthfully) that he'd been intending to get up, have a bit of breakfast in a local cafe, start work at 8am and drive home after his shift was finished - long after he would have sobered up again.  Didn't make a blind bit of difference.

In reply to TobyA:

I felt so chastened by Curbar yesterday that I may never go back! (Grit HVS after not having climbed grit HVS in many years…that felt like more of a punch in the face than the night before. And I was on the one that is supposed to be steady at the grade!)

In reply to Paul Sagar:

So far this spring everything is feeling far more uphill than before which is disappointing! I'm going for some post-viral thing which makes sense after getting ill twice since New Year, once covid which I recovered from fine then one not covid, that I think I still have some after effects from. But probably this is just wishful thinking and an excuse for getting old.

But Curbar HVS are pretty full on. Just go for ones that are cracks the whole way and take a bunch of cams so even if they are bloomin' hard work you don't need to feel terrified! I'm not steady at that grade, but oddly have a better success rate at Curbar than I do at Stanage. So avoid Stanage HVSs for the foreseeable!

In reply to deepsoup:

because the offence is being in charge of a vehicle https://www.pdalaw.co.uk/services-for-you/road-traffic-offences/drunk-in-ch....

cf use of mobile phone if parked up with engine off but keys in ignition.

In reply to mrjonathanr:

The workaround to this was classically to hand keys in at the bar at the pub if you were kipping in the car park, as without the keys you'd not be considered in charge.

Never thought of it with regard to campers, but yes, I guess the person who is in charge of the vehicle shouldn't drink unless it's on private land.

In reply to deepsoup:

So how far off the road do I need to be to have a couple of mugs of wine and then doss in my car legally? Verge rather than layby? How far down a track or off the road on a grassy area? An official campsite? Anything that isn't tarmac? 

In reply to Howard J:

Fly camping does seem now to mean "irresponsible wild camping", alongside the term "fly tipping".

Some campervan users do one, some do the other.  As I said above, broadly the same rules apply to both, apart from that you can hardly hide a campervan entirely.  But if you stay in the middle of a housing estate for your 2 weeks hollibobs and take a dump on the pavement every morning, you're clearly "fly camping"

In reply to TobyA:

Good lord, I just checked my logbook and the last time I climbed grit HVS was October 2019! That's criminal! (And not wonder I felt spanked yesterday.) 

In reply to Neil Williams:

I assume breathalysers connected to the ignition are going to become more common. Especially with the US law pushing its use being likely to bring prices down.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Dunno.  I'm not trying to set myself up as an expert here, merely pointing out the risk.
Of your list, the campsite is the only location I'd chance it personally.  YMMV

In reply to Robert Durran:

Either on private property not accessible to the public or you give someone else the keys.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Get a time-locked safe with added breathalyser double lock feature for your keys.

I just used to hide the keys under a rock and kip in the boot in a sleeping bag. It might have been dodgy but I'm sure it was less dodgy than kipping in the driver's seat with the keys in the ignition. If I was a magistrate I'd struggle to believe anyone trying that excuse. 

In reply to Brown:

If Jimtitt is right, then almost all the nights I have some wine when feral van dossing (I very rarely use campsites) are potentially illegal. To be perfectly honest I'm just going to continue not worrying about it. 

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Read this earlier today, saw the first flurry of posts, popped back just to read the avalanche of from what I can see, mostly vitriolic diatribe.

Come on UKC, it's one thing to explore the situation that the OP found themselves in and has posted a well meaning PSA about, it's another to go for an all out, ever widening character assassination of all and sundry.

I've posted a couple of questions/answers/opinions over the years and had a little ribbing/needling for my pains, but this thread has become akin to something from MumsNet/my kids WhatsApp groups - without the entertainment value!

Do we all want ready made popcorn or should I get some of the Butterkissed microwave stuff . . .

In reply to BRILLBRUM:

The issue of feral van dossing is of highly relevant personal interest to many on here so it is perfectly natural that this incident should spark a wide ranging discussion.

In reply to BRILLBRUM:

TBH by UKC-threads-involving-me standards this has been about a 3/10. 
 

In reply to Robert Durran:

I wonder if there have been any prosecutions of people being over the limit parked up in their van with clearly no intention of driving? It sounds to me like one of those things that everyone one has heard about and is perhaps technically true but had never actually happens.

In reply to DaveHK:

I mentioned one above.  A work colleague who picked up a 12-month ban the best part of 20 years ago and told me about it himself.  That's how I first became aware of this, and it certainly wasn't a mere technical possibility in his case. 

I'm not going to name him (not that it would make any difference if I did), and I don't much care whether you believe me or not.

In reply to deepsoup:

I'm not accusing you of lying here, just speculating about whether it actually much of a risk for someone in the back of a campervan or van converted for sleeping.

In reply to DaveHK:

I used to bed down in the van fairly regularly, usually when travelling between jobs or when the company I was contracting to were too tight to sort out a hotel for a job miles from home, and I never worried about it.

I used to be a real drinker and I'd generally have a few pints in a local, or tins in the van. I had the rozzers knock on the door a couple of times, they'd either seen me climbing into the back of the wagon after exiting the pub, or a concerned citizen had reported me parked up enjoying a beer and a book. Never had any bother, just explained what the score was and was left in peace. 

I'm well spoken and don't look too freaky though, and I'm always scrupulously polite to the old bill.

In reply to TechnoJim:

With reference to the attack on Paul, the thing that really stood out (and boiled my p1ss) was the use of language by his assailants - "people like you". They've decided he was "other" and therefore a legitimate target for their rage, which feels quite indicative of the mood music of the nation, to me at least.

The Peak is rammed these days and there are loads of obvious issues with that as stated upthread, but people quietly minding their own business don't deserve to be hassled and assaulted, irrespective of where they happen to have parked their vehicle.

In reply to TechnoJim: It's easy though to come up with a scenario where you've had a few, an incident like the OP's occurs and the police turn up while you're moving half a mile up the road...

In reply to Paul Sagar:

The problem is I guess 75% of van users weren't big users of the outdoors previously, most enjoy the views and a little ramble, but weren't or aren't necessarily actively walking, climbing, caving etc entire days several times a week. For want of a better phrase they don't understand the outdoors, etiquette or even the old fashioned but still relevant country code. The obsession with the nc500 being an example, where over 500miles of drving most won't stray more 500m from the road on foot. 

In reply to wbo2:

Sure, although I think in this scenario it would unfortunately be much more likely you'd go for 'fight' (or perhaps 'run')  rather than 'drive away'.

Anyway, I don't think the onus should be on a van sleeper abstaining from a delicious beverage after a hard day's climbing/working/whatever just in case they need to move their vehicle away from headbanging bigots.

In reply to ExiledScot:

Random number plucked out the air followed by uninformed speculation...

In reply to DaveHK:

A friend and former member of the UKC parish was living in his van full time at the same time as holding a fairly respectable professional job.  One night the police found him extremely drunk in the driver's seat, with keys in the ignition and arrested him.  Unfortunately in the process, they accidentally locked his keys in the van.  After night in the cell, no charges were pressed and he was released the next morning and left to sort himself out.  Still wearing pub clothes, he needed to change before going into the office.  With no access to the (locked) van, he had to rummage through a bag of clothes left outside a charity shop in the hour of finding something that would fit.  He's 6'3" and ended up going to the office in very short trousers and a very tight shirt.

So they don't always prosecute, and do make sure you have easy access to spare keys if you're living a van life.

In reply to Sam W:

Another example - a car, not a van, sleeping it off but with the key in the ignition to activate the radio.  This probably only made the news because it was a celebrity.  So, I expect there are many more such convictions or at least charges.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-15675623.amp

I can’t easily find a source for the number of convictions for being “drunk in charge of a vehicle”, which is the charge that could be brought against someone sleeping drunk in a camper van and in possession of its keys.  Avoiding a charge would seem to come down to not attracting attention and, failing that, not winding the officers who visit up.  Should one be charged, it seems convincing the magistrates/jury that you had no intention to drive the vehicle is the crux of the defence.  Leaving the keys elsewhere seems bombproof (*) but is clearly non ideal.  I wonder about leaving a steering lock on the steering wheel, that would add to the case by making it clear there was no immediate intent to drive the vehicle.  I’m very risk adverse about loosing my licence - let alone going to prison - so I’d not risk it.

(*) unless you’re parked on a hill and have a manual handbrake… I know someone who tried this by turning the key to “off” when descending a mountain road.  They forgot about the steering lock and much hilarity ensued, thankfully without any harm to bystanders.

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Hi Paul, an fyi for if you (or anyone else) are stuck looking for somewhere to park up again, the Yorkshire Bridge Inn isn’t a million miles from Hathersage and has let people park up overnight, same for the Ayre Arms at Calver as long as you arrive before closing and buy a pint.

In reply to paul_in_cumbria:

Thanks - that’s really good to know. 

In reply to Robert Durran:

I thought the definition was public access, hence it includes a privately owned pub car park and everything you have described is accessed by the public (you) driving past. 

Possible exception for campsite as paying guest.

In reply to wintertree:

That's interesting, I thought you'd be OK in a car park but apparently most are classed as public spaces, so you can still be prosecuted for drunk in charge of a vehicle. 

In reply to DaveHK:

The figure of course totally random speculation, over the decades I've seen a change in van users, in the 70s and 80s as kid I was surrounded by it, my father worked in that sector, I was forced to move to England when he took a job at Catterick Caravans, now Leisure World, everything we did related to vans of one type or another, caravan club weekends in a farmers field, big national rallies, trade shows... I had a t3 myself but was never a shed dragged. 

Then primarily it was people who wanted a cost effective means of getting out to places more often, cheaper than hotels or b&b, more personal space than hostelling. 

Now it's seen as a middle age, middle class lifestyle choice, massive vans they can't drive properly, money is no limit, cruising around, but not doing anything.  Just listen to r2, near daily messages from people doing the nc500 in a van with a stupid name, never a mention of the great things to see if they got off the tarmac. 

Anyway it's these people who are unknowingly spoiling it for the likes of the OP trying to get more outdoor time on a budget.

Yes, I anticipate i sound like a ranting grumpy old man! 

In reply to Paul Sagar:

The defence to being drunk in charge of vehicle is that you had no intention of driving while over the limit.

Unusually for english law it is up to the defendant to prove this.

Perhaps a bed laid out in the back would be good evidence.

In reply to artif:

The last paragraph suggests "being an arse with the police" is a significant factor too.

In reply to wintertree:

From what I can see in that link, he was convicted of failing to provide a breath specimen rather than the drunk in charge of a vehicle charge for which he was originally arrested.

In reply to rj_townsend:

Indeed - rock and a hard place though, as they wouldn’t have been seeking a specimen if they had no interest in pressing charges for the “in charge” offence.  Difference is he could have contested an “in charge” offence more expansively.

In reply to MG:

Always good advice to avoid that.  But you do also have to be in the relatively privileged position that they don't decide to treat you like an arse before you say a word, just purely based on them not liking the look of you.

In reply to Paul Sagar:

I'm surprised by that. We learnt about it at school!!!

In reply to wintertree: The purpose, the necessity, of the arrest is so as to obtain the evidential breath test on the big machine back at the police station. As opposed to the initial roadside screening “breathalyser “ test.

For such a “drunk in charge” arrest if the police station test is under then it’s obviously no further action and release from custody. However, if over the limit it will then require , when the detainee is sober, an interview to establish the circumstances according to the known facts. Such as stated intentions , beds in the back - being asleep in that bed - locations of keys etc. The offence would still be made out and a charge would result. I don’t think the police can bin it themselves, the defendant has to go to court but if they convince the magistrates, on the balance of probability, they had no intention to drive then the magistrates can find them not guilty. However, if the person has failed to provide the evidential sample that is an offence of itself if the police request for it is valid. Which it is if over the limit in charge. In that case the defendant, following interview and charge, could still plead the case of no intention to drive. However, if believed the magistrates can then only choose not to hand out a driving ban. They must still convict for the fail to provide and likely fine and points

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

My school was busy teaching us that girls who had abortions went straight to hell and that condoms didn’t stop the aids virus (only celibacy outside of marriage does), so we never had time to get around to trivia like how to stay out of earthly jail. 

In reply to Robert Durran:

Not far at all if it's private land. (your own driveway is fine) 

In reply to Robert Durran:

Not so much potentially as actually.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

I learned about this because it happened to my dad, who one cold night in the 1960s decided he was the worse for wear and should not continue driving home. He pulled over and went to sleep with the engine - and hence the heater - still on, and ended up losing his licence. This prompted him to move to Canada where he met my mum. 

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

That's a bit of a myth.  It makes no difference whether or not it's private land so long as it's publicly accessible. 

I don't know about your own driveway, but if it's something like a pub car park or a forestry track that you can freely drive onto as a member of the public then all the same rules and regs that apply to driving on the highway are still in force.  (Which is obviously a bit academic if the chances of someone turning up wanting to enforce the law are negligible.)

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

Not really though because there isn't a clear definition of what drunk in charge means. It's not as simple as 'in the vehicle, in a public place, over the limit and with the keys.' Some people in that situation are found guilty and others are not.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

This can't be the distinction because if the police happened to be at the end of your drive and saw you stumble out to your car/van, clearly absolutely bladdered, and get into the driver's seat with the keys in your hand, they wouldn't wait for you to drive onto the road before stepping in.

What matters seems to be proving your lack of intent to drive, which is obviously a bit woolly and is very much going to depend on the attitude of the person in the van, the policeman involved and perhaps the court.

I occasionally indulge in a spot of delinquent feral van dossing and wouldn't drink while doing so unless I had another non-drinking driver with me. More because there's a small chance I could decide, or be asked, to move on than due to the even smaller risk of being done for just being in the vehicle and over the limit.

In reply to Luke90:

Would be interesting to know if anyone's been done at a bona fide campsite for this? I'd assume it's quite common for campers to have the car keys in the pocket. I've got in the car pissed to put the radio on which obviously means keys in the ignition, but not started the engine and having no intention to drive.

Makes you think.

In reply to Mike Stretford:

I wonder if that's why the campsite might lock the gate at night. It's then no longer public access and makes drink driving back from pub impractical (or at least off site).

In reply to DaveHK:

I seem to remember that you would also get done if you are over the limit as a passenger in your own car if the person actually driving was not legally allowed to drive your car or also pissed.

You can also get done for being drunk in charge of a horse. I remember a case 25 years ago involving a man riding home from the pub. His defence was that the horse knew the way home and that he was so drunk that he was not in charge of the horse and the horse was in charge. IIIRC the defence failed and he was convicted.

In reply to Brown:

Can you be done for riding a drunk horse?

In reply to Luke90:

I find this idea more than a little questionable.

If, for example someone had left their wallet in the car, then they would need to unlock said car to retrieve the wallet.

Furthermore, the actions of the Police as you describe them would involve them setting foot on private land, without a warrant, and, so long as you didn't leave your own property, no good reason to believe an offence was taking place (or about to).

If I actually had a drive, and was arrested by Police Officers on my own property just for going to my own car on my own drive, then I would most certainly demand the arrest of said Officers for criminal trespass, assault and unlawful arrest. If this didn't happen then I would make sure that the incident received as much coverage in the local paper (and tv) as possible, followed by a civil action for damages due to the effect on my character.

In reply to fred99:

I mean, I'm clearly not claiming any legal qualifications, it's just speculation and very unlikely to crop up anyway. But good luck getting the police arrested for trespassing on your drive without a warrant! Maybe my hypothetical would have been clearer if I'd suggested an additional detail of starting the car. I still don't reckon police would be expected to wait for the car to actually be driven onto a public road before intervening when it would be so much safer to step in before the car starts moving.

In reply to fred99:

There is clearly a defence here, and whilst unlikely, they could charge you.

If you appear drunk and you are getting in a car, they have good reason to believe an offence is taking place.

You would look very stupid.

In reply to Brown:

One of our neighbours was a steam engine fanatic. He used to drive to the local pub in his steam engine. I asked him what would happen if he was breathalysed.  He said that if you were over the limit it was the Police's responsibility to move the vehicle. I have no idea if the bit about moving the vehicle was true, but it's a good story!

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Going back to the OP and restraint in not hitting back 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-65466493

In reply to Paul Sagar:

Just a data point relating to the bits of the thread I was reading this morning.

Here's what the Stanage lay-by looked like at 6am today. 7 campers of the large/very large Transit types (including one converted DHL delivery van, very creative), and one poor bugger sleeping in a small Ford.

That's on a random weekday, albeit one with a nice forecast. My experience is that this is the bare minimum of vans at any time of day and any day of the week. Obviously more at the weekends. There really should be some PO boxes installed up there so the permanent residents can get their mail delivered

I didn't go further than the Plantation, but could also see from there at least one white van in each of the lay-bys between there and the Dennis Knoll. Pretty normal in my experience.

It's notable how it's changed over the years. I remember it being the case 10+ years ago that mates who'd try to kip in their cars/vans by Stanage would get moved on by the wardens. I guess that's either not the policy any more, or there just isn't the budget/will to enforce it. I've not really paid attention to that legal/permissive aspect of it as van sleeping is not something I do, but the change in car/van camping numbers in the National Park obviously can't be missed. 

In reply to ChrisBrooke:

The warden used to move vans. Usually waking them up early in the morning so they didn't want to stay for long periods as some do now. Apparently there is actually a bye law which prohibits overnight parking on the North Lees Estate. The warden who did this retired and the policy has not been enforced since. The location on the top of the hill is not covered by this as far as I know.

In reply to hang_about:

Yep, this could easily have been me. Terrifying to think what could have been. 

In reply to The New NickB:

What offence ?

To give another example - what if you have left something in your car (which is parked on the drive), and you ask your 12-year old son to fetch it ?

Your son is evidently under age, so Police Officers decide to arrest him for a driving offence - according to your logic, your son is guilty as hell, which is plainly ridiculous.

Lets say your vehicle is a motorcycle, and you're not wearing a helmet whilst you move said bike (up a slight ramp to prevent water ingress) into your garage - are you now saying that PC Plod can arrest you for not wearing a helmet ?

I suggest that YOU are the person who is stupid.

In reply to fred99:

The offence is being drunk in charge of a motor vehicle 

https://www.ashmanssolicitors.com/blog/drunk-in-charge-of-a-vehicle-vs-drin...

In reply to fred99:

I've avoided getting involved in this thread, as a former van owner that realised I was part of the problem in Scotland but FFS.

If you look like you've had a few and look as if you're about to hop in a car and drive then I'd say it's reasonable grounds for intervention. 

In reply to fred99:

Ever seen the Facebook page "Angry People in Local Newspapers"?