Clamping

keano_afc

I know what you're thinking, another thread.

Long story short, my mother in law parked over at my apartment for a few minutes this morning, forgot to call the company to book the car in and got clamped. She was only there for 10 minutes. Its a private company so really dont want to have to fork out the €120.

Two things, am I right in thinking removing the clamp as its on private property and clamped by a private firm is ok? And if it is, is there anyone who is in the Bray/Shankill area who would be free to do it?

I am aware this has come up before but a search of the forum threw up threads from last year.

djimi

Remove the clamp if you wish, but bear in mind that clamping has been brought in at the instruction of the complex management company, and acting against their instructions could have consequences. Your call.

John_Mc

djimi wrote: »

Remove the clamp if you wish, but bear in mind that clamping has been brought in at the instruction of the complex management company, and acting against their instructions could have consequences. Your call.

The management company won't want anything to do it. Just try ringing them about it and you'll get immediately fobbed off regardless of the circumstances.

You are correct in that because it's a private company, there will be no consequences as long as you responsibly dispose of the clamp. Do not leave it lying around as this is the proof they need to be able to do you for criminal damage!

keano_afc

So is it best to take it off and dispose of it and say nothing or take it off and call them to come collect it?

John_Mc

Well I took three off at the same time. I rang them, told them they clamped me incorrectly and they could come and take them off now or I'd do it for them. The guy on the phone said take 'em off yourself and hung up on me.

So I did just that with an industrial bolt cutters which I leased for €5 from a hardware hire place. They gave me a special rate when I told them what it was for :-)

Stick the clamp in your boot and take it with you. You can drop it off at a recycling centre when it suits you.

Best of luck!

keano_afc

I rang them and tried to be reasonable. They said no payment no release. Told them I'm taking it off myself and they started on some "car was clamped according to the rules of the complex". Gonna call the management company and see if they can give me the all clear to remove it.

John_Mc

keano_afc wrote: »

I rang them and tried to be reasonable. They said no payment no release. Told them I'm taking it off myself and they started on some "car was clamped according to the rules of the complex". Gonna call the management company and see if they can give me the all clear to remove it.

Don't waste your breath. They dont wanta know about it.

keano_afc

John_Mc wrote: »

Don't waste your breath. They dont wanta know about it.

Spot on. Rang them and they couldn't give a toss. My only concern is that the leeches know my address. Nothing they can do I imagine.

DrumSteve

keano_afc wrote: »

Spot on. Rang them and they couldn't give a toss. My only concern is that the leeches know my address. Nothing they can do I imagine.

Are there cameras there to prove that you are cutting it off?

corktina

keano_afc wrote: »

Spot on. Rang them and they couldn't give a toss. My only concern is that the leeches know my address. Nothing they can do I imagine.

what are you thinking of? The Management Co employ the clampers.

keano_afc

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/travel_and_recreation/traffic_and_parking/parking_fines_and_vehicle_clamping.html

Found this. Seems there no legislation regards private property. So don't know what repercussions I could face. As far as I know there are no cameras here.

Guy:Incognito

John_Mc wrote: »

Don't waste your breath. They dont wanta know about it.

From the op's own words the car was clamped according to the rules of the complex so what exactly should they be listening to?

At the end of the day OP, the management company is working for the owners (so you if your an owner) so the owners are effectively employing the clampers. The whole thing smacks of being happy that the clampers are there (or at the very least disinterested having not objected when they were first brought in or tabled motions to have them removed at agm's) because you know your space will always be free but once your caught yourself then its "****ing clampers" time.

John_Mc

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

From the op's own words the car was clamped according to the rules of the complex so what exactly should they be listening to?

At the end of the day OP, the management company is working for the owners (so you if your an owner) so the owners are effectively employing the clampers. The whole thing smacks of being happy that the clampers are there (or at the very least disinterested having not objected when they were first brought in or tabled motions to have them removed at agm's) because you know your space will always be free but once your caught yourself then its "****ing clampers" time.

Clampers are exploiting a grey area of the law. How can it be legal to immobilise property belonging to someone else, until you pay them money? Sounds like extortion to me!

They are an unregulated industry that do what they want. Any appeal will always be rejected.

As far as I'm concerned, I'm just as much entitled to exploit this grey area of law as they are.

djimi

corktina wrote: »

what are you thinking of? The Management Co employ the clampers.

Exactly. If there is an issue with clamping in the apartment complex then its the management company that you go to, not the clampers. If you are a home owner in the complex then you are part of the management company.

djimi

John_Mc wrote: »

Clampers are exploiting a grey area of the law. How can it be legal to immobilise property belonging to someone else, until you pay them money? Sounds like extortion to me!

They are an unregulated industry that do what they want. Any appeal will always be rejected.

As far as I'm concerned, I'm just as much entitled to exploit this grey area of law as they are.

Its one of those things that is not specifically legal, but that fact that it is still allowed to happen on a widespread basis, and the fact that local councils themselves employ the service of clamping companies, suggests that it is not anywhere near as illegal as people think it is. If it was legally extortion then the likes of NCPS would not be allowed to operate.

John_Mc

djimi wrote: »

Its one of those things that is not specifically legal, but that fact that it is still allowed to happen on a widespread basis, and the fact that local councils themselves employ the service of clamping companies, suggests that it is not anywhere near as illegal as people think it is. If it was legally extortion then the likes of NCPS would not be allowed to operate.

The county councils have legislation to allow it happen and can enforce it. That's why you'd never interfere with a Dublin CC clamp.

The likes of NCPS are completely different and while not illegal, it's still a grey area. They can clamp my car and I can cut it off, the only thing illegal about doing so is criminally damaging their clamp. This is what a guard explained to me when I called them.

I'm pretty sure there's legislation coming through to regulate the private clamping industry as it's badly needed.

mullingar

Dont forget that some private companies now have licences/permits from the CoCo to cover certain public roads, hence would fall under the CoCo clamping by-laws.

However, this could never be extended to private grounds.

If it was me, I'd call the de-clamping fairies who come along and sprinkle magic fairy dust on the clamp and it magically disappears in front of your eyes..............;)

keano_afc

mullingar wrote: »

Dont forget that some private companies now have licences/permits from the CoCo to cover certain public roads, hence would fall under the CoCo clamping by-laws.

However, this could never be extended to private grounds.

If it was me, I'd call the de-clamping fairies who come along and sprinkle magic fairy dust on the clamp and it magically disappears in front of your eyes..............;)

Well thats what I wish I had done, and will be doing next time. I came home from work still trying to sort this to discover that my mother in law had come over and paid them the release fee. She was concerned that the fine doubles for every 24 hour period you are clamped, and I might have needed more time to arrange removal of the clamp.

Hopefully there wont be a next time but I wont be as civil with them again.

TheZ

http://nebula.wsimg.com/53e672581a806f6f5ae78602683bcbcf?AccessKeyId=4CB8F2392A09CF228A46&disposition=0&alloworigin=1

Interesting case from UK recently where clamping company lost


charge was held to be a penalty and unenforceable under contract law

corktina

Interesting read...the Judge didn't like parking firms I reckon.

Guy:Incognito

keano_afc wrote: »

Well thats what I wish I had done, and will be doing next time. I came home from work still trying to sort this to discover that my mother in law had come over and paid them the release fee. She was concerned that the fine doubles for every 24 hour period you are clamped, and I might have needed more time to arrange removal of the clamp.

Hopefully there wont be a next time but I wont be as civil with them again.

Why do you not just discuss it with the management company ? They employ the clampers and if you are an owner you are the management company. Why are there clampers in the block if no one wants them? The thing is though you can't have it both ways, if you come home from work and there's no where to park there's mm or much you can do.

keano_afc

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Why do you not just discuss it with the management company ? They employ the clampers and if you are an owner you are the management company. Why are there clampers in the block if no one wants them? The thing is though you can't have it both ways, if you come home from work and there's no where to park there's mm or much you can do.

I had called the management company. I rent the property. The clampers were brought in about 4 years ago as one or two people form outside were coming in and parking in the visitor bays. It wasnt carnage, just a couple of cars so we were surprised to see clampers being brought in. Originally it was NCPS, and the release fee was €60 and you generally had a grace period of about 30 mins to call your car in.

RFS have now take over and for want of a better term they are a shower of ****es. In my example, my wife was talking to 2 builders who happened to see them clamp my mother-in-laws car no more than 5 minutes after she parked it. As I said she was literally 10 mins in my place just dropping keys off. The builders told the clamper the car was only parked 5 mins ago and maybe should give her a chance to call it in, but he ignored them and stuck the clamp on. I've had run-ins with them before. My own car was parked in the visitor section for about a week while I was waiting for a new fob for the underground car park. I was calling the car in every day and the guy from RFS told me not to bother, he'll stick me on a long term list so I dont have to call in every day. I come down the next morning to go to work and I'm clamped, making me an hour late for work.

The management company dont want to know, they said the clampers are an independent company and they dont deal with them. I asked why they were there in the first place and was told it was because of a couple of cars who parked in off the street. Its basically a money making racket and RFS are getting every penny they can.

Del2005

John_Mc wrote: »

Clampers are exploiting a grey area of the law. How can it be legal to immobilise property belonging to someone else, until you pay them money? Sounds like extortion to me!

They are an unregulated industry that do what they want. Any appeal will always be rejected.

As far as I'm concerned, I'm just as much entitled to exploit this grey area of law as they are.

You aren't exploiting a grey area of the law if you damage property.

djimi

keano_afc wrote: »

The management company dont want to know, they said the clampers are an independent company and they dont deal with them. I asked why they were there in the first place and was told it was because of a couple of cars who parked in off the street. Its basically a money making racket and RFS are getting every penny they can.

When you say management company, do you mean the actual management company (made up of owners in the complex) or the management agent (an external company like Wyse or Falcondale)? The latter wont give a toss; its the former that you need to deal with. Although as a tenant you will probably need to go through your landlord as management companies do not generally like dealing directly with tenants.

John_Mc

Del2005 wrote: »

You aren't exploiting a grey area of the law if you damage property.

Let them prove it if you take it with you

If they weren't exploiting the grey area of the law, then their property which is immobilising yours, won't be damaged.

kiwilemon

John_Mc wrote: »

Let them prove it if you take it with you

If they weren't exploiting the grey area of the law, then their property which is immobilising yours, won't be damaged.

Informed by ncps that management companys who are not doing any work on apartments blocks and therefore not receivimg any management fees are taking on ncps to regulate parking bays. Management co takes delivery of permits only hand out to owners paying fees. The only owners paying fees are landlords who domt live on complex and rent to tenants... Its a scam to get everyone to pay fees even when in dispute with management co. If you domt pay up you cant park in your parking bays without getting clamped. I beleive draft laws to regulate clamping on private property was published april 2013 but bill not yet passed therefore there is no law at present regarding this. Does anyone know any more about this and exactly what it means.

djimi

In what way is it a scam? You dont pay your maintenance fees then you get denied access to the services of the complex. Seems fair enough to me? Im fairly sure the management companies make no money from complex clamping; they bring it in in the hope that it will force compliance when it comes to the payment of maintenance fees.

username123

djimi wrote: »

In what way is it a scam? You dont pay your maintenance fees then you get denied access to the services of the complex. Seems fair enough to me? Im fairly sure the management companies make no money from complex clamping; they bring it in in the hope that it will force compliance when it comes to the payment of maintenance fees.

Its a scam in the sense that there is no legal backing that allows a private company to restrain your private property to enforce payment of an unrelated debt. Worse, people who are not even related to the debt are clamped. For example, an owner doesnt pay his fees. He doesnt live there. His tenant is clamped. How is this fair on the tenant? A relative of a payer parks and doesnt get clamped. A relative of a non payer parks and gets clamped. Neither relative has anything to do with the management fees. How is that anything but extortion? Its not legal and as until Leo Varadkar gets the finger out re the clamping legislation its going to continue. As far as Im concerned its extortion. I have voted and campaigned against it in my estate yet it was still voted in by a majority of fools who cant see the bigger picture.

Sorry for the rant, I absolutely abhor private clamping thugs.

Guy:Incognito

username123 wrote: »

Its a scam in the sense that there is no legal backing that allows a private company to restrain your private property to enforce payment of an unrelated debt. Worse, people who are not even related to the debt are clamped. For example, an owner doesnt pay his fees. He doesnt live there. His tenant is clamped. How is this fair on the tenant? A relative of a payer parks and doesnt get clamped. A relative of a non payer parks and gets clamped. Neither relative has anything to do with the management fees. How is that anything but extortion? Its not legal and as until Leo Varadkar gets the finger out re the clamping legislation its going to continue. As far as Im concerned its extortion. I have voted and campaigned against it in my estate yet it was still voted in by a majority of fools who cant see the bigger picture.

Sorry for the rant, I absolutely abhor private clamping thugs.

If you don't try to use the parking space that hasn't been paid for they won't clamp anything.

If your clamped because your landlord doesn't pay his bills then your issue is with your landlord.

so if laws are passed clearing up any grey area, you'll suddenly be fine with the clampers?

I'd imagine most people in your area are fine with it because they can come home every night and know there won't be anyone in their parking spot leaving them with no comeback.they pay their bills anyway so it's no skin off their nose if the ones that don't get clamped.

djimi

Its absolutely not fair on tenants and I would dearly love if legislation was brought in to prevent action being taken against tenants who have no involvement and usually no knowledge of a dispute between their landlord and the management company, and have absolutely no power whatsoever to prevent such action being taken against them.

But "the bigger picture" is that management companies are having to take action to protect themselves and their property. Where management fees are not paid, everyone in the complex suffers, and what is happening more and more is that the minority of owners are having to pay higher fees to compensate for those who dont bother paying, just so that essential services can be provided. There is little that management companies can do to chase those who dont pay (chasing them legally is costly and time consuming and by the sounds of it usually pretty fruitless), so they feel they need to take action to try and force people into paying their fees by introducing measures such as clamping.

Also there is a big issue of complex car parks being seen as free car parking in towns etc; clamping has been very effective in preventing this also.

The issue really is with how the clamping companies conduct themselves, not with the idea of clamping in general. If it was a regulated industry, with an independant and reliable appeals process then there would be no issue. And I agree, this is something that badly needs to happen.

But I dont agree that clamping in private complexes is a scam. Like I said, the management comapny who felt the need to introduce it gains nothing from the clamping, and generally speaking it is introduced to a complex as a result of a bigger problem that needs taking care of.

username123

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

If you don't try to use the parking space that hasn't been paid for they won't clamp anything.

If your clamped because your landlord doesn't pay his bills then your issue is with your landlord.

so if laws are passed clearing up any grey area, you'll suddenly be fine with the clampers?

I'd imagine most people in your area are fine with it because they can come home every night and know there won't be anyone in their parking spot leaving them with no comeback.they pay their bills anyway so it's no skin off their nose if the ones that don't get clamped.

In my particular situation there are no assigned parking spaces. There is a huge communal carpark that is never more than half full. Clamping doesnt deny people use of the service or leave parking spaces free. It blocks up parking spaces. It was voted in because people saw clamping versus non payers as the lessor of two evils. However, it remains to be seen how much of the outstanding (we were given a figure for the hard core non payers) will pay up as a result considering the complex is in the middle of a normal estate with plenty of free parking on public roads throughout. In practice what it likely to happen is the introduction of clamping wont collect any (or very little) of the outstanding monies and instead the traffic management in the estate will become worse as people just park on public roads instead of in the apartments carpark. So - bigger picture, ignored.

If laws are passed regulating private clampers then I would be ok with it yes. The current situation is unacceptable to me whereby private clampers arbitrarily decide on fees, penalties, no independent appeals etc...

I have no issue with council clamping. I have no issue with clamping to control parking on public roads or other traffic bye laws. I have an issue with someones private property being restrained to enforce payment of unrelated debt. Its simply not moral, legal or fair.

username123

djimi wrote: »

Its absolutely not fair on tenants and I would dearly love if legislation was brought in to prevent action being taken against tenants who have no involvement and usually no knowledge of a dispute between their landlord and the management company, and have absolutely no power whatsoever to prevent such action being taken against them.

But "the bigger picture" is that management companies are having to take action to protect themselves and their property. Where management fees are not paid, everyone in the complex suffers, and what is happening more and more is that the minority of owners are having to pay higher fees to compensate for those who dont bother paying, just so that essential services can be provided. There is little that management companies can do to chase those who dont pay (chasing them legally is costly and time consuming and by the sounds of it usually pretty fruitless), so they feel they need to take action to try and force people into paying their fees by introducing measures such as clamping.

Also there is a big issue of complex car parks being seen as free car parking in towns etc; clamping has been very effective in preventing this also.

The issue really is with how the clamping companies conduct themselves, not with the idea of clamping in general. If it was a regulated industry, with an independant and reliable appeals process then there would be no issue. And I agree, this is something that badly needs to happen.

But I dont agree that clamping in private complexes is a scam. Like I said, the management comapny who felt the need to introduce it gains nothing from the clamping, and generally speaking it is introduced to a complex as a result of a bigger problem that needs taking care of.

There are alternatives like a keyfob gate that prevents access to anyone who hasnt paid fees while not inconveniencing the rest of us.

djimi

username123 wrote: »

There are alternatives like a keyfob gate that prevents access to anyone who hasnt paid fees while not inconveniencing the rest of us.

If the company is having to introduce clamping as a means to try and get people to pay their management fees, where do you think the money to install and maintain a security gate is going to come from?

username123

djimi wrote: »

If the company is having to introduce clamping as a means to try and get people to pay their management fees, where do you think the money to install and maintain a security gate is going to come from?

The sinking fund.

Or perhaps a reduction in the outrageous fee being paid to a largely useless managing agent.

djimi

username123 wrote: »

I have no issue with council clamping. I have no issue with clamping to control parking on public roads or other traffic bye laws. I have an issue with someones private property being restrained to enforce payment of unrelated debt. Its simply not moral, legal or fair.

Its not any not any more immoral or unfair than having some residents thinking that they are above paying management fees, at the expense of those who are prepared to pay what they owe.

Whether its legal or not is a massive grey area. The fact that NCPS and their ilk are still in business and operating suggests to me that clamping on private property is nowhere near as illegal as people like to make it out; if it was organized illegal extortion then it simply would not be happening.

djimi

username123 wrote: »

The sinking fund.

The sinking fund is there for when there is a genuine emergency. It should not, nor would it be, used for such a thing as installing a security gate.

Like it or not, employing clampers is a quick and cheap way for management companies to deal with the issue. The only people who should have an issue with it are the very people that it is being brought in to deal with in the first place.

username123

djimi wrote: »

Its not any not any more immoral or unfair than having some residents thinking that they are above paying management fees, at the expense of those who are prepared to pay what they owe.

Whether its legal or not is a massive grey area. The fact that NCPS and their ilk are still in business and operating suggests to me that clamping on private property is nowhere near as illegal as people like to make it out; if it was organized illegal extortion then it simply would not be happening.

You should read up on the history of clamping in the UK. It was happening, more aggressively than here. It took a judge to say it was extortion and illegal for it to be outlawed. That just hasnt happened here. I refer you to the Law Society Gazette May 2011 for an article by a barrister talking about the legality of clamping on private property - the article focuses on clamping in supermarket carparks but its still private clamping. The opinion of members of the legal profession is that it would go the same way as the UK if it got to the precedent setting court here - but it would take someone with money to go that far.

username123

djimi wrote: »

Like it or not, employing clampers is a quick and cheap way for management companies to deal with the issue.

I will come back to you in a few weeks/months time to let you know if the clamping has been successful - ie, have the monies been collected from the non payers. I suspect it will not be successful - leaving us all in the same financial situation as previously, with the added inconvenience of having clampers on the land.

djimi wrote: »

The only people who should have an issue with it are the very people that it is being brought in to deal with in the first place.

Nonsense, Im fully up to date with fees and I have a huge issue with clampers being brought in - and I am not the only one.

I write to Leo Varadkar weekly to implore him to get on with the legislation and encourage everyone else I know to also. I cannot move out away from this disgusting practice as I am in massive negative equity.

djimi

username123 wrote: »

You should read up on the history of clamping in the UK. It was happening, more aggressively than here. It took a judge to say it was extortion and illegal for it to be outlawed. That just hasnt happened here. I refer you to the Law Society Gazette May 2011 for an article by a barrister talking about the legality of clamping on private property - the article focuses on clamping in supermarket carparks but its still private clamping. The opinion of members of the legal profession is that it would go the same way as the UK if it got to the precedent setting court here - but it would take someone with money to go that far.

The law society can talk all they want; until someone actually takes that case it doesnt matter a jot whether it is considered to be illegal in their opinion or not, because until someone takes that case it is going to continue to happen. The Gardai are not interested in getting involved either.

username123

djimi wrote: »

The law society can talk all they want; until someone actually takes that case it doesnt matter a jot whether it is considered to be illegal in their opinion or not, because until someone takes that case it is going to continue to happen. The Gardai are not interested in getting involved either.

Law is for the rich, until someone can afford to take a case it wont change - unless Leo Varadkar gets his legislation in place.

djimi

username123 wrote: »

I will come back to you in a few weeks/months time to let you know if the clamping has been successful - ie, have the monies been collected from the non payers. I suspect it will not be successful - leaving us all in the same financial situation as previously, with the added inconvenience of having clampers on the land.

I might not be all that effective, but nothing really is, and if it gets even once person to pay up then it will be seen as being worth it.

username123 wrote: »

Nonsense, Im fully up to date with fees and I have a huge issue with clampers being brought in - and I am not the only one.

What I mean is that if you are up to date with your fees then there is no reason to fear your car being clamped.

As far as I see it, Id prefer to fight the issue of non-payment, which would be costing me money directly (as I am subsidizing those who dont pay) rather than fighting the means that was brought into to try and deal with these people, but each to their own I guess.

corktina

OK, let's look at clamping a different way....the charge for parking for non-permit holders is €80, the clamp is one way to ensure someone doesn't leave without paying.

Is this any different to Tesco charging €80 for your groceries and having Security and store detectives to make sure you don't leave without paying.?

I think people object to their car being interfered with, so maybe a non-interference way of doing this is called for. A gate or a obstruction to block a car in (such as another vehicle) might be preferable. I'm sure someone cold cme up with something better

username123

djimi wrote: »

As far as I see it, Id prefer to fight the issue of non-payment, which would be costing me money directly (as I am subsidizing those who dont pay) rather than fighting the means that was brought into to try and deal with these people, but each to their own I guess.

I understand, however to me the greater moral wrong is that of bringing in clampers.

To give you an analogy - I would not agree to the method of payment enforcement being that they go and break the legs of the non payers. Or worse, that they break the legs of tenants whose landlords do not pay. I similarly do not agree with clamping.

djimi

username123 wrote: »

I understand, however to me the greater moral wrong is that of bringing in clampers.

To give you an analogy - I would not agree to the method of payment enforcement being that they go and break the legs of the non payers. Or worse, that they break the legs of tenants whose landlords do not pay. I similarly do not agree with clamping.

Its not exactly a comparible analogy in fairness; there is nothing legally ambiguous about GBH.

Like I said, each to their own. To me, its far worse morally to leave your neighbours having the pick up the tab of a grand or probably more when you dont pay your management fees, or face the consequence of everyone having to do without vital services in the complex. Id prefer these people feel some short term inconvenience (and lets face it, thats all it really is) than me having to be out of pocket because of them.

Unless you have a better way to deal with it that doenst involve an outlay of money that most likely isnt there to spend?

djimi

corktina wrote: »

I think people object to their car being interfered with, so maybe a non-interference way of doing this is called for. A gate or a obstruction to block a car in (such as another vehicle) might be preferable. I'm sure someone cold cme up with something better

A gate/barrier is absolutely the best way to deal with it, but unfortunately as I said when measures are being brought in to deal with non payment of fees then chances are the money is no there to install and maintain such a system.

And, as I have seen first hand, it wouldnt be long before someone simply dismantled the gate system the first time they couldnt get their car in...

username123

djimi wrote: »

Unless you have a better way to deal with it that doenst involve an outlay of money that most likely isnt there to spend?

This is the bit that annoys me - no other option was given, discussed - nothing. I mean, surely a meeting to group think alternatives would have been useful before taking the disgusting step of introducing clamping?

I guess my outrage stems from the fact that I am trapped. I cant leave. I never ever would have bought there if clamping was on the table. Now the rules have changed and even though I pay my fees - I am being punished. This is my home, my daily life that is affected. Im absolutely furious about it. Its bad for my mental and physical health. It just makes me want to stop paying my own fees.

djimi

username123 wrote: »

I guess my outrage stems from the fact that I am trapped. I cant leave. I never ever would have bought there if clamping was on the table. Now the rules have changed and even though I pay my fees - I am being punished. This is my home, my daily life that is affected. Im absolutely furious about it. Its bad for my mental and physical health. It just makes me want to stop paying my own fees.

This is what I dont understand. You pay your fees, so in what way is your daily life being affected? What have you got to worry about exactly?

Clamping exists in complexes up and down the country, and for the most part it doesnt affect the people who live their and pay their fees.

username123

djimi wrote: »

This is what I dont understand. You pay your fees, so in what way is your daily life being affected? What have you got to worry about exactly?

Clamping exists in complexes up and down the country, and for the most part it doesnt affect the people who live their and pay their fees.

Ive to contact the clamping company every I have a visitor. So I have to keep a charged phone with credit in it at all times. I have to keep track of the two visitor passes I have (one friend has already accidentally driven off with one). Ive to get dressed and walk outside in any weather to get the reg plate of any visitor called in in case they get clamped. Ive to worry that my own car is not clamped in error. How does it not affect my daily life?

Edited to add - its also gonna make the the place harder to rent out and has probably devalued the property too because lets face it - who wants to buy where there is clamping? I wouldnt even look in a place that had it.

djimi

Thats just a poor internal system in fairness, and something that the management company need to deal with. Its perfectly possible to have a system of visitor passes that are left on the dashboard that causes minimum disruption (plenty of people I know have this system and have no issues at all). Having to call in a reg number is just nonsense.

username123

djimi wrote: »

Thats just a poor internal system in fairness, and something that the management company need to deal with. Its perfectly possible to have a system of visitor passes that are left on the dashboard that causes minimum disruption (plenty of people I know have this system and have no issues at all). Having to call in a reg number is just nonsense.

But you still have to go out to your visitors car and put the pass in it and then go back out and get it back then they leave. Its still hassle.

This has also caused a horrible atmosphere within the estate. Personally Ive zero interest in maintaining a facade of friendliness with any moron who voted in favour of something so disruptive.

djimi

username123 wrote: »

But you still have to go out to your visitors car and put the pass in it and then go back out and get it back then they leave. Its still hassle.

Less hassle than coming home to find someone parked in your space and preferable to paying money for someone who isnt paying their fees.

And its not exactly the end of the world; visitor arrives, you give them the pass, they run out, you get it from them when they leave. Its part and parcel of living in a managed complex imo.

username123 wrote: »

This has also caused a horrible atmosphere within the estate. Personally Ive zero interest in maintaining a facade of friendliness with any moron who voted in favour of something so disruptive.

Ive no interest in maintaining a facade of friendliness with a neighbour who I know is costing me money that I shouldnt have to be spending.

You still havent come up with a better, more cost effective solution to clamping. I agree that your particular system is poor, but if you have an issue with clamping as an overall system that how better do you propose dealing with it, given that the money to implement an expensive security system probably isnt there?