Dublin City Clamping Appeals Process

elleelle19

Hi,

Just wondering if anyone has every successfully appealed Dublin city council and got a refund or heard of anyone doing so?

Got clamped on Friday, had a valid ticket but it had slipped down the dash out of view. Just wondering if I should even bother sending in an appeal.

Thanks

Victor

About 1% of people appeal Dublin City clampings of which 30-50% are successful.

I can't see your appeal being successful as you made the mistake, not them.

ballsymchugh

it's always worth chancing anyway. what have you got to lose by scanning the ticket and emailing it to them?

BrianD

elleelle19 wrote: »

Hi,

Just wondering if anyone has every successfully appealed Dublin city council and got a refund or heard of anyone doing so?

Got clamped on Friday, had a valid ticket but it had slipped down the dash out of view. Just wondering if I should even bother sending in an appeal.

Thanks

Firstly, I believe that clamping is a necessary eveil in a city like Dublin. It has had its benefits in that it is now possible to visit the city on business and have a possibility of getting on-street parking.

Having said that I believe that the standards of the current clamper are low and they are victimising motorists in areas where there is poor or confusing signage. This is bringing the whole system into disrepute.

elleelle19 I would strongly recommend you make an appeal. What is the point of clamping? It's a deterrent to prevent motorists parking illegally and to ensure that you pay for your parking in pay and display areas. The only thing you have done wrong is not displayed your ticket showing payment. This is fair grounds for a clamp but also fair grounds for an appeal if you can prove that you demonstrate that you have paid for your parking.

I believe that contractor relishes the fact that people do not appeal or bring them to book. On Monday, I was clamped wrongly by the DCC contractor. Despite the fact they claimed that they had photographic proof that the clamping was valid I insisted that they release me immediately. A supervisor intervened and the crew returned to my vehicle and unclamped me and another vehicle. This was without any payment being made.

Here's the standard approach in the appeals process where the P&D ticket is not visible. This is taken from the Parking Appeals Officers report 2007.

Permit fell off, was blown over and/or was illegible from the outside.

50% Refund

Driver purchased a permit and placed it on the dash. The wind or the closure of the door caused the permit to be dislodged. The onus is on the motorist to both Pay & Display and therefore the motorist was careless in failing to ensure that the permit could be seen. He/She has contributed to the reason for the clamp and should pay at least a portion of the charge.

Victor

BrianD wrote: »

Having said that I believe that the standards of the current clamper are low and they are victimising motorists in areas where there is poor or confusing signage. This is bringing the whole system into disrepute.

You don't explain the victimising, but if the signage is poor, thats a grounds for an appeal / complaint and I imagine it will get fixed rather quickly.

I believe that contractor relishes the fact that people do not appeal or bring them to book.

But there is no finanical gain to the contractor for clamping. Why would they maliciously clamp?

On Monday, I was clamped wrongly by the DCC contractor. Despite the fact they claimed that they had photographic proof that the clamping was valid I insisted that they release me immediately. A supervisor intervened and the crew returned to my vehicle and unclamped me and another vehicle. This was without any payment being made.

You don't explain the difference of opinion.

Here's the standard approach in the appeals process where the P&D ticket is not visible. This is taken from the Parking Appeals Officers report 2007.

I'm surprised at that, as the parking disc could have come from another car.

BrianD

Victor - the information regarding the appeals process and the refund procedure is copied and pasted directly out of the Parking Appeals officers report for 2007. The document is available from DCC. Certainly a P&D ticket could have come from another car but it would be hard to arrange.

In regard to victimisation. I do believe that the current clampers go for the lowest hanging fruit. A couple of years ago there was contant policing of North Wall Quay where the signage was poor, the poorly marked bus bay in Ranelagh is another popular spot as is the coach bay on Mespil Rd. For example on the Saturday of the Michael Buble concert almost 20 cars were clamped on Mespil Rd. Yes, all these cars were in the wrong but it took more than clamper van to do this. Only last week cars were starting to fill up the same coach bay for the Leinster V Munster game. The signage is obviosly confusing motorists. This is just unneccesary on a Saturday night and reinforces to motorists that it's victimisation (a la speed checks on motorways). The moto of the contractor is to "promote sensible parking" - why not provide a visible presence in the area and advise motorists?


In regard to my own de-clamp. I was clamped for "pay and display - no valid ticket" on a street where there was no signage as required (the council had actually removed it all). They still clamped and took photos. They are supposed to notice items like signage before they undertake a clamp. It wastes my time, their time and the councils money if they don't.

It's true that the clampers don't get paid per clamp (like they did or do in London). They clampers are paid an annual fee and according to the Irish Times (Car clamping in Dublin costs twice the revenue generated by release fees - Jan14, 2010) the service operates at a substantial shortfall - almost €5m. The contract is up for renewal in 2011. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that there is an invisible pressure to reduce this shortfall. A reasonable person could work out how the shortfall can be made up - clamp more cars. The "flat fee" system doesn't really have any advantage over the "per clamp".

Our man in Havana

In regard to my own de-clamp. I was clamped for "pay and display - no valid ticket" on a street where there was no signage as required (the council had actually removed it all). They still clamped and took photos. They are supposed to notice items like signage before they undertake a clamp. It wastes my time, their time and the councils money if they don't.

Did you get your money back?

BrianD

Haddockman wrote: »

Did you get your money back?

I didn't have to pay! I had the pleasure of watching them remove the clamp and then tearing the ticket in two! They didn't have much option, they were wrong.

Our man in Havana

I am surprised they didn't adopt a pay now appeal later stance.

Victor

BrianD wrote: »

It's true that the clampers don't get paid per clamp (like they did or do in London). They clampers are paid an annual fee and according to the Irish Times (Car clamping in Dublin costs twice the revenue generated by release fees - Jan14, 2010) the service operates at a substantial shortfall - almost €5m. The contract is up for renewal in 2011. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that there is an invisible pressure to reduce this shortfall. A reasonable person could work out how the shortfall can be made up - clamp more cars. The "flat fee" system doesn't really have any advantage over the "per clamp".

While sure, breaking even would be nice, the council makes its money by people actually paying for their parking. Its now more than 90%, but was about 50% before clamping.

Ham'nd'egger

BrianD wrote: »

I didn't have to pay! I had the pleasure of watching them remove the clamp and then tearing the ticket in two! They didn't have much option, they were wrong.

Can I be bold and ask you exactly what happened in your case; did they clamp and them unclamp your car or what? And exactly how did it come to be that they released your car in this case?

Victor

I imagine Brian gave out stink on the phone saying there was no signage.

BrianD

Victor wrote: »

I imagine Brian gave out stink on the phone saying there was no signage.

I contacted them and pointed out that they were in the wrong. I was aware that the signage had been removed for almost a week. Therefore it was no longer a valid pay and display zone and there was other prohibition signs.

After speaking to the supervisor they agreed to send the crew back to review the situation and they then agreed to remove the clamps (two vehicles involved).

Re cost of clamping article. The article doesn't revela how much DCC makes from parking operations and one would presume (or hope) that the cost of enforcement is a low percentage of this. One also presumes that the cost of enforcement may also include other items other than the clamping contract - maintaining signage etc. However €9m is a big cost and if there is a shortfall of €5m then the pressure is on to reduce that shortfall in these times. Especially if the contract is up for renewal. In all the coverage this €5m is diplomatically referred to as a "shortfall". A more obvious word comes to mind.