Does there have to be a sign for clamping

fungie

I got clamped in my underground car park in my apartment. There are no signs (or if there are they are extremely extremely discrete and not visible driving into block or underground garage).

My question is, does there have to be adequate visible notice that there is clamping in operation?

p.s. There is no mention of clamping on the house rules of the apartment block.

lifeandtimes

fungie wrote: »

I got clamped in my underground car park in my apartment. There are no signs (or if there are they are extremely extremely discrete and not visible driving into block or underground garage).

My question is, does there have to be adequate visible notice that there is clamping in operation?

p.s. There is no mention of clamping on the house rules of the apartment block.

Yes there does. I can't remember the wording but my Mrs got a clamp refunded after she argued that the sign which stated there was clamping in the area was to small to see and also far away from where she had parked to have seen it, especially at night and in the rain when she was clamped. She provided photo evidence and everything. Quite proud of herself and so was I.

So yeah check the area if there isn't adiquete signage etc you can appeal it with evidence and see what happens

Effects

What are the grounds on which you were clamped?
I've been clamped by NCPS in my own numbered space before for it being a commercial vehicle. I paid fine and had it refunded on appeal.
Another time I was given incorrect advice over the phone after someone else parked in my spot. They guided me to an incorrect visitor parking spot and I was clamped. I paid but they never refunded me despite appealing.
Mod. Deletion. Suggesting illegal act.

fungie

update:

I eventually found a clamping sign but its hidden away in an area that is isolated (not in underground car park where was clamped) and only mentions a disabled spot, picture attached.

I appealed to ncps and they rejected it (it took less than a day). They cited that:

"There are public display notices erected in this car park informing motorists that no unauthorised or illegally parked vehicles and that immobilisation is in operation."

This is an incorrect statement and I can prove this easily by both video and pictures. I dont know what I can do though, Mod deletion(Possible defamatory statement)

FishOnABike

fungie wrote: »

update:

I eventually found a clamping sign but its hidden away in an area that is isolated (not in underground car park where was clamped) and only mentions a disabled spot, picture attached.

I appealed to ncps and they rejected it (it took less than a day). They cited that:

"There are public display notices erected in this car park informing motorists that no unauthorised or illegally parked vehicles and that immobilisation is in operation."

This is an incorrect statement and I can prove this easily by both video and pictures. I dont know what I can do though, (Mod deletion)

A case for the small claims court ?

lifeandtimes

fungie wrote: »

update:

I eventually found a clamping sign but its hidden away in an area that is isolated (not in underground car park where was clamped) and only mentions a disabled spot, picture attached.

I appealed to ncps and they rejected it (it took less than a day). They cited that:

"There are public display notices erected in this car park informing motorists that no unauthorised or illegally parked vehicles and that immobilisation is in operation."

This is an incorrect statement and I can prove this easily by both video and pictures. I dont know what I can do though

If you can't see it from where you parked your car and your writing is small you should have a case forms further appeal but small claims may be better if you've already exhausted that avenue

GM228

FishOnABike wrote: »

A case for the small claims court ?

lifeandtimes wrote: »

small claims may be better

The Small Claims Procedure will not deal with any clamping related issues.

cruizer101

If NCPS are clamping in your apartment block that means the management company hired them in, so I think that is the route you need to go to find out more, under what basis were they contracted etc.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

fungie

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

What do you mean?

lifeandtimes

fungie wrote: »

What do you mean?

Not one who is educated in this matter but to take stab in the dark. The sign says unauthorised parkers will be clamped or issued with a fine. In your situation you were not given the option of either and only issued with a clamp.

Maybe fred can shed more light on it

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

lifeandtimes

Fred Swanson wrote: »

The sign says "Parking for disabled badge holders only".

Therefore it offers parking to that class of drivers only. There is no offer to non disabled badge holders. So there is no contract with them, so you can't charge them a contractual sum. The only remedy is to sue for trespass for a nominal sum of damages.

We then get into the realm of penalties. Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage & Motor Co Ltd is the leading authority there.
The sign clearly states it is a penalty and I doubt the courts would fail to follow Dunlop if it was ever tested.

Ah so because they only cater for disabled drivers and do not offer non disabled anywhere to park they in turn shoot themselves the same way a car park may offer parking without a disabled drivers parking spot ?

I.e. this area is for disabled drivers only and we don't cater for able drivers or have anywhere for them to park so if you park here it's technically trespassing as they have left you no other choice?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

by8auj6csd3ioq

But it gives a warning to unauthorised they will be clamped. Woudn't unauthorised be anyone who does not have the parking badge?

Heisenberg1

OP if your not happy with the outcome of the appeal you can make an appeal to a clamping appeal officer in the NTA as per the vehicle clamping act 2015.


http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2015/act/13/section/22/enacted/en/html#sec22

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Heisenberg1

Fred Swanson wrote: »

Which has not been commenced yet.

Is it not inforce since the 1st June ??

ohnonotgmail

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

Is it not inforce since the 1st June ??

not according to the link.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/isbc/2015_13.html

Heisenberg1

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

not according to the link.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/isbc/2015_13.html

I read it through citizens advice.

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

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

ohnonotgmail

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

oddly enough they dont seem to be wrong. SI 211 of 2017 commences part of the act in June and other parts in October. the section related to clamping and signage was commenced on June 1st.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

ohnonotgmail

irishstatutebook.ie seems to be a couple of weeks behind.

delboythedub

They need a permit from local council to place clamps on cars in your underground carpark or any other place , pubs , shops etc. A Rathdown Dunlaoire C.C employee told me so. And you can ask to see the current permit. Go for it.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

GM228

Heisenberg1 wrote: »

OP if your not happy with the outcome of the appeal you can make an appeal to a clamping appeal officer in the NTA as per the vehicle clamping act 2015.


http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2015/act/13/section/22/enacted/en/html#sec22

S22 is not due to commence until October. Until then the Vehicle Clampin Act 2015 (Commencement) Order 2017 has commenced Part 1 and some of Part 2 of the Act in order to allow the NTA amongst other things to produce draft regulations for public consultation.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

the section related to clamping and signage was commenced on June 1st.

Only the parts which allow the NTA make regulations and none have been made yet, they are to produce draft regulations soon for public consultation.

ohnonotgmail

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Whats that skippy, they didnt have clear signage displayed? Strewth.

Sorry. *


*not really.

GM228

GM228 wrote: »

Only the parts which allow the NTA make regulations and none have been made yet, they are to produce draft regulations soon for public consultation.

Forgot to post this, but for anyone interested the draft regulations are available for viewing.

There's still a few days to submit any feedback on them to the NTA here.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

hullaballoo

I would question whether such "regulations" can be brought in by way of SI.

I would also question the constitutionality of the procedures the SI purports to establish.