SoCal beach recommendation

[DesertDwellers]

We're thinking of driving from PHX to southern California for 3 days at Christmas. We've been to Chula Vista RV; we really enjoyed it and they have space available. Are there any other parks on the water that you would recommend? We have a class A, no toad, need full hook ups (that's my requirement LOL). Thanks in advance!

[Rice]

udidwht wrote:
I occasionally will recite passages of (22658) to the hunky dory security rock watcher and they reluctantly walk off in frustration.

Have you read California Vehicle Code Section 22953(a)? It says:

An owner or person in lawful possession of private property that is held open to the public, or a discernible portion thereof, for parking of vehicles at no fee, or an employee or agent thereof, shall not tow or remove, or cause the towing or removal, of a vehicle within one hour of the vehicle being parked.

In plainer English, if a vehicle is parked on private property that is open to the public and provides free parking, it can't be towed until it has been parked for one hour. That means vehicles can be towed after they've been parked for one hour. Not 96 hours.

Here are some references:

From a Los Angeles Times story about predatory towing:

California law requires that tow truck drivers wait one hour before towing vehicles that are parked illegally in commercial lots.


From an LA Weekly story about tow companies holding vehicles for ransom:

The state of California says you have an hour of parking in a private, nonresidential, non-hotel lot before your car can be towed...


From the step-by-step guide on a tow company's website:

STEP 3 - HAS THE CAR BEEN THERE FOR AT LEAST ONE HOUR?
Before we can tow from private property you must verify the vehicle has been there for one hour.


From Consumer Connection, a publication of the California Department of Consumer Affairs:

One-Hour Rule A vehicle must be parked for one full hour before being towed unless it is parked in a manner that interferes with an entrance or exit, is within 15 feet of a fire hydrant, or in a fire lane. The curb of a fire lane must be painted red and be clearly labeled "No Parking Fire Lane."


From the website of a business that sells a kit for suing tow companies in small claims court:

If the property has free parking open to the public then a vehicle can be towed after it has been improperly parked for one hour.

This applies to restaurants, stores and other places which are private property, there is no charge to enter and park, and the property is open to the public to enter.

Example: A store parking lot says parking is for customers only. If you park there you can only be towed after one hour.

If a vehicle is towed before it has been parked for an hour the penalty is two times the towing and storage fees.


The California Vehicle Code allows vehicles to be towed after one hour, not 96 hours. This is important to RVers who want to overnight in a parking lot because presumably they'll be there for more than one hour.

[Gottahaveit]

:R Let's not beat the dead horse any longer 😉

[udidwht]

Rice wrote:

udidwht wrote:
'The vehicle has been issued a notice of parking violation, and 96 hours have elapsed since the issuance of that notice.'

Catch word...and

No, I asked for language that says that the "notice and 96 hours" applies in situations where appropriate signage has been posted, and what you quote doesn't say that.

The "notice and 96 hours" is just one of the circumstances in which vehicles on private property can be towed. The Code says vehicles may be towed "under any of the following circumstances" and lists four distinct situations, which are independent of each other:

1. If appropriate signage exists
2. the one you keep citing about notice and 96 hours
3. If a vehicle is inoperable and the cops have been called and 24 hours has elapsed since the cops were called
4. The property where the vehicle is parked has been improved with a single family dwelling

So a vehicle can be towed if circumstance 1 exists OR if circumstance 2 exists OR if circumstance 3 exists OR if circumstance 4 exists.

It says "any of the following circumstances," not "all of the following circumstances," and definitely not "any of the following circumstances except #2 applies to some or all of the others."

If there is appropriate signage (circumstance 1), then the 96 hours (circumstance 2) doesn't apply.

That is what the words say, plus your insistence that the 96 hours applies to all the situations doesn't make sense when one of the situations has a 24-hour provision. In cases of internal inconsistencies or conflicts, laws will acknowledge them by saying something like "Notwithstanding the provisions in Section X ..." That the legislature didn't do that here shows that the 96 hours doesn't apply because otherwise they would have to explain away the conflict.

And really? A homeowner has to wait 96 hours to have a car towed out of his driveway? If you think the 96 hours applies to circumstance 1 (appropriate signage exists), then it also has to apply to circumstance 4 (parked in a driveway at somebody's house). That's a ridiculous conclusion.

The language clearly says that any one of the four circumstances listed will support towing, and having one of them apply to the other three leads to nonsense conclusions.

Also, you could spend a little time looking at various tow company and law firm websites, not to mention discussion forums, that address towing cars on private property in California, and you'll find that they don't agree with you. That's because the language is clear: vehicles can be towed if any one of those circumstances exists, and one of them is that the property owner has erected the proper signage. If the signs are there, the property owner doesn't have to give notice (actually, he's already given notice via the signs) and he doesn't have to wait 96 hours before having a vehicle towed; that requirement is in a separate provision, distinct from the one about proper signage.

I honestly don't know how to make it any clearer to you (and hopefully to anyone who believes they can park on whatever private property they want as long as they don't exceed 96 hours because you say so).

A homeowners property is entirely different than a property that is leased such as a business establishment with 'public' parking lot/s. When a business decides to have (X) security/and/or person to enforce parking rules and those rules start with the issuance of parking citation then they must also wait the duration.

Signage is a mere legal formality to allow those parking to know that they may be towed for....(much like having a 'Beware of dog' sign on your property if you own a dog.) Guess what happens when someone is bit and you have no signage?

As I said to 99.9% of us CVC 22658 will never apply (long gone). To the remaining small percent many don't want the hassle and reluctantly pay and off they go.

I occasionally will recite passages of (22658) to the hunky dory security rock watcher and they reluctantly walk off in frustration. Tow drivers are the last to go to regarding the CVC. They work for profit and have only (1) thing on their mind and isn't the CVC.

[Rice]

udidwht wrote:
'The vehicle has been issued a notice of parking violation, and 96 hours have elapsed since the issuance of that notice.'

Catch word...and

No, I asked for language that says that the "notice and 96 hours" applies in situations where appropriate signage has been posted, and what you quote doesn't say that.

The "notice and 96 hours" is just one of the circumstances in which vehicles on private property can be towed. The Code says vehicles may be towed "under any of the following circumstances" and lists four distinct situations, which are independent of each other:

1. If appropriate signage exists
2. the one you keep citing about notice and 96 hours
3. If a vehicle is inoperable and the cops have been called and 24 hours has elapsed since the cops were called
4. The property where the vehicle is parked has been improved with a single family dwelling

So a vehicle can be towed if circumstance 1 exists OR if circumstance 2 exists OR if circumstance 3 exists OR if circumstance 4 exists.

It says "any of the following circumstances," not "all of the following circumstances," and definitely not "any of the following circumstances except #2 applies to some or all of the others."

If there is appropriate signage (circumstance 1), then the 96 hours (circumstance 2) doesn't apply.

That is what the words say, plus your insistence that the 96 hours applies to all the situations doesn't make sense when one of the situations has a 24-hour provision. In cases of internal inconsistencies or conflicts, laws will acknowledge them by saying something like "Notwithstanding the provisions in Section X ..." That the legislature didn't do that here shows that the 96 hours doesn't apply because otherwise they would have to explain away the conflict.

And really? A homeowner has to wait 96 hours to have a car towed out of his driveway? If you think the 96 hours applies to circumstance 1 (appropriate signage exists), then it also has to apply to circumstance 4 (parked in a driveway at somebody's house). That's a ridiculous conclusion.

The language clearly says that any one of the four circumstances listed will support towing, and having one of them apply to the other three leads to nonsense conclusions.

Also, you could spend a little time looking at various tow company and law firm websites, not to mention discussion forums, that address towing cars on private property in California, and you'll find that they don't agree with you. That's because the language is clear: vehicles can be towed if any one of those circumstances exists, and one of them is that the property owner has erected the proper signage. If the signs are there, the property owner doesn't have to give notice (actually, he's already given notice via the signs) and he doesn't have to wait 96 hours before having a vehicle towed; that requirement is in a separate provision, distinct from the one about proper signage.

I honestly don't know how to make it any clearer to you (and hopefully to anyone who believes they can park on whatever private property they want as long as they don't exceed 96 hours because you say so).

[udidwht]

Rice wrote:

udidwht wrote:
You'll be very hard pressed to have anyone tow you until the allotted amount of time has passed. Your misinterpreting the code. It is simply illegal to tow a vehicle immediately and without notice (ex. fire-lane violation)

I'm not interpreting anything--I'm simply reading the words of the "Bible" that you refer to.

Please quote the language in the Code that says that if the signage provided for in the Code is in place, a property owner must still wait 96 hours before towing a vehicle.

'The vehicle has been issued a notice of parking violation, and 96 hours have elapsed since the issuance of that notice.'

Catch word...and

To 99.9% of folks that won't even apply. Because they'll be long gone. Businesses like to limit liability. Hence the wait period. I've seen signage state 72-96 hours but state law is 96 hours.

But like I said to 99.9% of us 22658 won't apply because we'll be long gone. Even more so if your passing thru.

[Rice]

udidwht wrote:
You'll be very hard pressed to have anyone tow you until the allotted amount of time has passed. Your misinterpreting the code. It is simply illegal to tow a vehicle immediately and without notice (ex. fire-lane violation)

I'm not interpreting anything--I'm simply reading the words of the "Bible" that you refer to.

Please quote the language in the Code that says that if the signage provided for in the Code is in place, a property owner must still wait 96 hours before towing a vehicle.

[udidwht]

Chum lee wrote:

udidwht wrote:

Chum lee wrote:
Mission Bay RV Resort (private) in San Diego is adjacent to the water and Mission Bay Park but not directly on the water. 2 week limit. Full hookups, a little pricey, (Good Sam discount) walk into Pacific Beach for shopping. Bicycles are a good idea.

Any of the State Parks i.e. San Elijo, Carlsbad, Doheny Beach are nice and on the beach. Reservations suggested.

See google maps for park layouts.

Just a general suggestion for the SoCal area. Do not plan on parking your RV on any public street overnight in beach areas, especially if you sleep in it. San Diego used to have a city ordinance prohibiting sleeping in ANY vehicle at any time. That may have changed recently due to public outcry. If you must, you can park overnight at some Amtrak/trolley stations, if appropriately sized spaces are available or at some Park and Ride lots but don't make a habit out if it.


Chum lee

That was ruled unconstitutional by the 9th circuit court in California here awhile back.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-la-homeless-legal-fees-20150819-story.html

Thanks for the update. I knew something was in the works legally but I didn't know the schedule. I have friends/family in the SoCal areas so when we visit, its always an issue finding a place to park a +30' 18,000lb. GVWR vehicle with out stirring the hornets nest.
Sometimes the highly restrictive CC&R's (which are everywhere) are worse than the law.

Chum lee

An RV is not a vehicle that can be easily towed like a car (hook and go). Lots are a plenty in California and most (if not all) businesses cite (parking notice) then wait 72-96 hours prior to attempting tow due to liability.

[udidwht]

Rice wrote:

udidwht wrote:
Parking lot will do. Vehicles can not be towed from a lot until:

1. Parking notice issued

2. 96 hours have passed

The only exception to this would be fire lane violation. That is from the California vehicle code 22658

That is simply not true. The Vehicle Code says that vehicles may be towed "under any of the following circumstances," and your 96 hours after a notice is issued is just one of them. The others are:

If appropriate signage is posted, or

If the vehicle can't safely be driven on the highways (and other conditions have been met), or

If the vehicle is on property that is improved by a single family dwelling.

Those "vehicles will be towed at owner's expense" signs are everywhere in California, and allow towing to take place immediately and without notice, contrary to what you claim.

udidwht wrote:
Cities can not differentiate and/or make distinctions between surface streets/road/s and/or highways. The California vehicle code encompasses them all and is considered the 'Bible' in terms of what to refer to when an officer has a need to know.

I hope the officer does a better job of reading the code than you did.

But I think you are misunderstanding my point, partly because you're (wrongly) getting hung up on the word "oversized." Cities aren't legislating what an oversized vehicle is, or attempting to re-define what is considered an oversized vehicle in the Vehicle Code (and note that the Vehicle Code doesn't actually use that term). The cities are just using that term as a shorthand to describe the vehicles that aren't allowed to park on streets during certain hours, whether they're RVs, commercial buses, or a big van used as a daily driver by a family of 10.

There simply isn't a conflict between the city ordinances and the California Vehicle Code.

You'll be very hard pressed to have anyone tow you until the allotted amount of time has passed. Your misinterpreting the code. It is simply illegal to tow a vehicle immediately and without notice (ex. fire-lane violation)

You'll also not likely ever encounter an officer on scene due to lots generally not being city property. Cities can not make use of the word 'Oversize' without defining what oversize is. This is where the CVC comes into play. Which is where your misunderstanding it. And yes it's in the CVC. How else do you think CHP & city officers officers deal with large oversized vehicles on roads/highways? They will always refer to the vehicle code.

City ordinances must fall in line with state law/s. In this case the California vehicle code. Officers are very limited when it comes to private property. Cities as well. Just because the city may have an ordinance doesn't mean the ordinance is legal. Hence the 9th circus ruling in California.

Yes I typed circus. The 9th has been long referred to as a circus.

[Chum_lee]

udidwht wrote:

Chum lee wrote:
Mission Bay RV Resort (private) in San Diego is adjacent to the water and Mission Bay Park but not directly on the water. 2 week limit. Full hookups, a little pricey, (Good Sam discount) walk into Pacific Beach for shopping. Bicycles are a good idea.

Any of the State Parks i.e. San Elijo, Carlsbad, Doheny Beach are nice and on the beach. Reservations suggested.

See google maps for park layouts.

Just a general suggestion for the SoCal area. Do not plan on parking your RV on any public street overnight in beach areas, especially if you sleep in it. San Diego used to have a city ordinance prohibiting sleeping in ANY vehicle at any time. That may have changed recently due to public outcry. If you must, you can park overnight at some Amtrak/trolley stations, if appropriately sized spaces are available or at some Park and Ride lots but don't make a habit out if it.


Chum lee

That was ruled unconstitutional by the 9th circuit court in California here awhile back.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-la-homeless-legal-fees-20150819-story.html

Thanks for the update. I knew something was in the works legally but I didn't know the schedule. I have friends/family in the SoCal areas so when we visit, its always an issue finding a place to park a +30' 18,000lb. GVWR vehicle with out stirring the hornets nest.
Sometimes the highly restrictive CC&R's (which are everywhere) are worse than the law.

Chum lee

[Rice]

udidwht wrote:
Parking lot will do. Vehicles can not be towed from a lot until:

1. Parking notice issued

2. 96 hours have passed

The only exception to this would be fire lane violation. That is from the California vehicle code 22658

That is simply not true. The Vehicle Code says that vehicles may be towed "under any of the following circumstances," and your 96 hours after a notice is issued is just one of them. The others are:

If appropriate signage is posted, or

If the vehicle can't safely be driven on the highways (and other conditions have been met), or

If the vehicle is on property that is improved by a single family dwelling.

Those "vehicles will be towed at owner's expense" signs are everywhere in California, and allow towing to take place immediately and without notice, contrary to what you claim.

udidwht wrote:
Cities can not differentiate and/or make distinctions between surface streets/road/s and/or highways. The California vehicle code encompasses them all and is considered the 'Bible' in terms of what to refer to when an officer has a need to know.

I hope the officer does a better job of reading the code than you did.

But I think you are misunderstanding my point, partly because you're (wrongly) getting hung up on the word "oversized." Cities aren't legislating what an oversized vehicle is, or attempting to re-define what is considered an oversized vehicle in the Vehicle Code (and note that the Vehicle Code doesn't actually use that term). The cities are just using that term as a shorthand to describe the vehicles that aren't allowed to park on streets during certain hours, whether they're RVs, commercial buses, or a big van used as a daily driver by a family of 10.

There simply isn't a conflict between the city ordinances and the California Vehicle Code.

[udidwht]

Rice wrote:
But San Diego, as one example, has an ordinance preventing RVs from parking overnight on city streets. So you might be able to sleep in your RV because the "no sleeping in vehicles" law was overruled, but in order to do that you'll have to have a place to park it. I would hope. Safety first, you know.

Parking lot will do. Vehicles can not be towed from a lot until:

1. Parking notice issued

2. 96 hours have passed

The only exception to this would be fire lane violation. That is from the California vehicle code 22658

It is also state law (California) that if an owner comes to find his vehicle being towed prior to the tow operator leaving the lot. They are required by law to return the vehicle to the owner unconditionally no questions asked. Not doing so is a misdemeanor. A fee of not more than one-half the cost of the regular tow fee can be charged. The regular towing charge may only be imposed after the vehicle has been removed from the property and is in transit.

[udidwht]

Rice wrote:
I looked again and still don't see any reference in the California Vehicle Code to "oversized" vehicles.

But I don't think the cities are trying to trump the Vehicle Code anyway. They're saying that certain sized vehicles can't park on their streets; they're not declaring what size vehicles can drive on roads, which I presume is what the Vehicle Code does.

Cities can not differentiate and/or make distinctions between surface streets/road/s and/or highways. The California vehicle code encompasses them all and is considered the 'Bible' in terms of what to refer to when an officer has a need to know.

[Rice]

I looked again and still don't see any reference in the California Vehicle Code to "oversized" vehicles.

But I don't think the cities are trying to trump the Vehicle Code anyway. They're saying that certain sized vehicles can't park on their streets; they're not declaring what size vehicles can drive on roads, which I presume is what the Vehicle Code does.

[udidwht]

Rice wrote:

udidwht wrote:
Fact is by California vehicle code does not specify an RV as an over-sized vehicle. If it were you'd be required to follow oversize vehicle procedures when traveling roads/highways. Cities can not trump the California vehicle code. Any officer will refer to the California vehicle code. City ordinances can not trump it.

I did a quick glance at the California Vehicle Code, and it doesn't talk about "oversized" vehicles--it talks about "overweight" vehicles. The city ordinances regulate parking of vehicles based on their physical size, not their weight, so there's no conflict between those ordinances and the California Vehicle Code, and the cities aren't trumping it.

You'll need to look further it's there. An officer will always make his/her decision based on the CVC nothing else. A city ordinance must fall in line with the California vehicle code. There are no if and or buts about it. They are counting on 99.9% of people not knowing this. I have personally seen many people just send a check in the mail all for nothing simply because they did not wish to take the time to challenge it.