Clamping

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Say my car is clamped by a private company hired by the managment of the apartment complex. If they clamp me, I cut off their clamp, would I get a summons? The area would be on the complex with a setdown limit of 20 minutes. They do have signs up, but I want to know if they have legal power to do this?

Sully

Dulce Damaged Herb wrote: »

Say my car is clamped by a private company hired by the managment of the apartment complex. If they clamp me, I cut off their clamp, would I get a summons? The area would be on the complex with a setdown limit of 20 minutes. They do have signs up, but I want to know if they have legal power to do this?

I would assume so. Similar happened in the WIT but the clampers lost the case as they had no by-laws to clamp in that area.

Del2005

Dulce Damaged Herb wrote: »

Say my car is clamped by a private company hired by the managment of the apartment complex. If they clamp me, I cut off their clamp, would I get a summons? The area would be on the complex with a setdown limit of 20 minutes. They do have signs up, but I want to know if they have legal power to do this?

It's illeagal for private clampers to clamp your car even if they have signs up. But it's also illegal for you to DAMAGE their clamp, but if you can remove it without damaging it there is nothing they can do, bar barring you from the car park. If you damage the clamp when taking it off you can be done for criminal damage.

Do a search on the Motors fourm for more info, they've gone into a lot more detail on some posts;)

Victor

Del2005 wrote: »

It's illeagal for private clampers to clamp your car even if they have signs up.

Is it also illegal for a car park to look the front gate with your vehicle inside?

I contend that you are wrong. There is an implied contract between property owner are vehicle owner that vehicles will be clamped under specific rules and that there is a charge for removing the clamp. Its no different from the vehicle owner going into a buffet restaurant and then being surprised when asked to pay.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Victor wrote: »

Is it also illegal for a car park to look the front gate with your vehicle inside?

I contend that you are wrong. There is an implied contract between property owner are vehicle owner that vehicles will be clamped under specific rules and that there is a charge for removing the clamp. Its no different from the vehicle owner going into a buffet restaurant and then being surprised when asked to pay.

What? How can you compare a buffet with clamping. Absolutely no link what so ever, extremely bad analagy.

The main point is that I live in this area, the agent who let out this apartment said "you can park there for a while to unload your car or load it, tell them <Agents Name> said it's ok".

I do not park there a lot, I do not park there for long periods of time, I do not obstruct ANY entrance or exit or any walkway or road. I would probably not cut it off, but I wouldn't like to pay for it either. The time that was on the notice was 10:30, this is the time I left my car, if they put the right time down they would have done it within a minute or two after I left my car. If it was at 10:51 and it was after the "20 minute setdown timer" I would have some, although limited, understanding.

McCrack

Dulce Damaged Herb wrote: »

What? How can you compare a buffet with clamping. Absolutely no link what so ever, extremely bad analagy.

The main point is that I live in this area, the agent who let out this apartment said "you can park there for a while to unload your car or load it, tell them <Agents Name> said it's ok".

I do not park there a lot, I do not park there for long periods of time, I do not obstruct ANY entrance or exit or any walkway or road. I would probably not cut it off, but I wouldn't like to pay for it either. The time that was on the notice was 10:30, this is the time I left my car, if they put the right time down they would have done it within a minute or two after I left my car. If it was at 10:51 and it was after the "20 minute setdown timer" I would have some, although limited, understanding.

You ask a question and when a poster attempts to address it you get narky and defensive because it's not what you want to hear.

There's nothing "illegal" about private companies clamping in private grounds where adequate notice is given that clamping is in operation (by signs). Simple as.

Del2005

Victor wrote: »

Is it also illegal for a car park to look the front gate with your vehicle inside?

I contend that you are wrong. There is an implied contract between property owner are vehicle owner that vehicles will be clamped under specific rules and that there is a charge for removing the clamp. Its no different from the vehicle owner going into a buffet restaurant and then being surprised when asked to pay.

What I'm saying is that a Private company has no right to refuse you use of your property. They can put up all the signs they like but when they have clamped your car they are in affect taking your car off you, which they have no legal powers to do. On some of the other threads here people have gone into more detail as to what you can and can't do, but I suspect it's not allowed to be discussed here.

McCrack wrote: »

You ask a question and when a poster attempts to address it you get narky and defensive because it's not what you want to hear.

There's nothing "illegal" about private companies clamping in private grounds where adequate notice is given that clamping is in operation (by signs). Simple as.

While it may not be illegal, they are on shaky legal ground when they clamp your car. If it was legal for then to clamp, how come it's not an offence to remove their clamp without damaging it as is the case with corporation appointed clampers?

McCrack

"While it may not be illegal, they are on shaky legal ground when they clamp your car. If it was legal for then to clamp, how come it's not an offence to remove their clamp without damaging it as is the case with corporation appointed clampers?"[/quote]

Del2005 Youre confusing criminal with civil law. If you can manage to remove the clamp without damaging it you are not guilty of any criminal offence, if you remove the clamp and damage it there is potential for the owner of the clamp to have you prosecuted for criminal damage.

If you remove the clamp yourself (with or without damaging it) and dont pay the release fee you are also potentially leaving yourself open to be sued for breach of contract (civil law). I use the word potentially as in reality I wouldnt see that ever happening.

Sully

McCrack: So any individual can clamp a car on private property once warning is given? Why is it then in the case a private clamping company brought against a WIT student the student won the case on the grounds the company did not have permission (by way of local laws I believe) to clamp.

Im sketchy on the details, but it had been discussed here before. Forgive me on my poor attempt at recalling the exact info!

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Not getting narky, it's very stupid to compare a crime with something like this. There's no link. I am greatful for the advice, the good advice.

The company are in charge of the parking and security of the place, they are the worst bunch of imbicles to deal with. It's ok to park in one area, but other areas, especially double yellow lines, is perfectly find. It's on the same property...

dermot_sheehan

It's an uncertain area of law in ireland at the moment regarding private clampers on private property.

For council employed clampers on a public road they are authorised by statute to clamp illegally parked vehicles.

On private property, the argument goes that if sufficient signage is up, you agree to the terms of entry as part of your licence for being on the private property. Your permission to be on the land is therefore governed by those terms. Those terms include the term that if you park your motor vehicle a certain way that it will be immobilized and payment has to be made to have the immobiliser removed.

Since you agree to that immobilizer being applied, the argument goes, you can not sue the clampers for detinue and you are denied the "lawful excuse" defence under the criminal damage act for damaging the clamp.

The analogy that is drawn is that there is private land with a gate with a sign saying if you park beyond two hours the gate will be closed and €100 has to be paid to open said gate.

To the best of my knowledge, this "contract" has not been tested in irish courts. Courts could construe it as violating the unfair terms in consumer contract regulations 1997, they could construe the penalty of whatever the fine is as a penalty clause and therefore unenforceable. To the best of my knowledge nobody has sued clampers for detinue to find out.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Thank you for that Gabhain7, very clear explanation.

Victor

gabhain7 wrote: »

Courts could construe it as violating the unfair terms in consumer contract regulations 1997, they could construe the penalty of whatever the fine is as a penalty clause and therefore unenforceable. To the best of my knowledge nobody has sued clampers for detinue to find out.

Well what is the reasonable cost of running a clamping operation? Dublin City Council don't make a profit when charging €80 per release.

Our man in Havana

Public sector operation, to be expected tbh.

Most of the less than reputable firms can and do make huge profits. There are very little overheads when you have no appeals department.

One man operation, self employed, van and a mobile phone. Very cost effective.

Carawaystick

victor, what's the consideration for the contract for a private motorist on private land?
and do dcc not contract a private operator to run the clamping operation?

Victor

Carawaystick wrote: »

victor, what's the consideration for the contract for a private motorist on private land?

Typically €120. There is a charge for unclamping, not clamping.

and do dcc not contract a private operator to run the clamping operation?

Sure. The cost of the operator is slightly more than the amount brought in by fees. They make their money from people actually paying their parking fees and society benefits from freed-up traffic.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Bond-007 wrote: »

Public sector operation, to be expected tbh.

Most of the less than reputable firms can and do make huge profits. There are very little overheads when you have no appeals department.

One man operation, self employed, van and a mobile phone. Very cost effective.

The clampers here look after everything, the underground parking, security, the works. I have seen people in vans that come out once you ring them.

Victor wrote: »

Typically €120. There is a charge for unclamping, not clamping.
Sure. The cost of the operator is slightly more than the amount brought in by fees. They make their money from people actually paying their parking fees and society benefits from freed-up traffic.

I think the guys charge 80 here, which isn't too bad compared to a lot of places, but it's still not nice to pay

I got 2 or 3 tickets from europay car parking, never payed them. I don't think they do anything about it. I don't think they can take you to court about it, I am not 100% sure about that though. Might cost them too much to do it.

Our man in Havana

Dulce Damaged Herb wrote: »

I got 2 or 3 tickets from europay car parking, never payed them. I don't think they do anything about it. I don't think they can take you to court about it, I am not 100% sure about that though. Might cost them too much to do it.

Those sort of private tickets (Euro Car Parks and other private tickets) rely on the laws of contract. The contract exists between the driver and the company. The company would have to be able to identify the driver and show that they had agreed to the terms of the contract.

It would be a difficult burden to overcome. Now what they may do is write to the registered owner and allege that they are liable. This is not true at all. They must go after the driver and the RO has no obligation to tell them who the driver was.

Victor

The car park operator could bar the vehicle / driver from using the car park.

Bond-007 wrote: »

the RO has no obligation to tell them who the driver was.

Unless they get a court order.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Victor wrote: »

The car aprk operator could bar the vehicle / driver from using the car park.Unless they get a court order.

Would be pretty expensive to get one? If the ticket is only 20 euro then I don't think it would be worth their while.

I know that they can deny you access, but that is more expenses. I think if they were to clamp on the second or third offence then they might get somewhere.

Our man in Havana

I think if they were to clamp on the second or third offence then they might get somewhere.

I would think that could be challenged as being excessive and a breach of contract.

Unless they get a court order.

They would be unlikely to be granted a Norwich Pharmacal Order in such a case.