Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

Clamped!

1…2021232526…46

Comments

  • #662
    MugMugs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,875 ✭✭✭✭MugMugs


    Anan1 wrote: »
    Stark wrote: »
    Because the other options are operating outside the law and they have no right to complain when people lawfully refuse to pay the extornionists. There are advantages to hiring Mafia protection too but that doesn't make it right.
    Why would you park in a private car park and knowingly flout the owner's rules?
    Private car park? What about housing estates? Incidents where people are clamped in their own parking spaces?


  • #663
    Anan1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,815 ✭✭✭✭Anan1


    Stark wrote: »
    Many people don't knowingly flout the rules. They err and get done for it.
    The OP knowingly flouted the rules.
    MugMugs wrote: »
    Private car park? What about housing estates? Incidents where people are clamped in their own parking spaces?
    What does this have to do with my question?


  • #664
    Drummerboy08
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,102 ✭✭✭✭Drummerboy08


    Lads, the last few pages of this thread is exactly why I don't post much in Motors anymore.

    I got involved in removing this clamp earlier in the week, because I don't agree with how clampers go about their work. Not because the OP could or couldn't afford the parking ticket. I couldn't care less about that.

    Nobody can disagree that the clampers are carrying out their business in a very underhanded manner at present. I was clamped very recently OUTSIDE MY OWN HOME because the CLAMPING COMPANY didn't send out the permit in time. That clamp was swiftly removed, and I am in the process of charging storage fees to the clamping company.

    I am also very concerned that someone who most likely is not trained, nor insured to touch my vehicle in any way can and will do so.

    If there was proper legislation brought in, and an assurance of a level of training for people who decide to become clampers is agreed upon, then I would have no problem with the practice.

    So, lets get back to the point here, and come down off our high horses.


  • #665
    MugMugs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,875 ✭✭✭✭MugMugs


    Anan1 wrote: »
    Stark wrote: »
    Many people don't knowingly flout the rules. They err and get done for it.
    The OP knowingly flouted the rules.

    That's a harsh statement. He went to.get change.


  • #666
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,244 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    MugMugs wrote: »
    Private car park? What about housing estates? Incidents where people are clamped in their own parking spaces?

    Did we not talk about that further up? Though you'll have to clarify the situation seeing as Stark and Marlow are moving the goalposts. Is the estate more than 50% still builder owned?

    The people in the estate employ the clampers. They have the power to get rid of them.


  • Advertisement
  • #667
    Anan1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,815 ✭✭✭✭Anan1


    MugMugs wrote: »
    That's a harsh statement. He went to.get change.
    For 20 minutes? That's knowingly flouting the rules.


  • #668
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,244 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Drummerboy08 wrote: »

    So, lets get back to the point here, and come down off our high horses.

    I'm amazed it took so long.


  • #669
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,196 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    Care to justify the situation in Drummerboy's case of the clamping company clamping him because they didn't send out the permit in time? I suppose you expect him to just move out of home while he waits for them to get round to it.


  • #670
    MugMugs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,875 ✭✭✭✭MugMugs


    Guy:Incognito wrote: »
    MugMugs wrote: »
    Private car park? What about housing estates? Incidents where people are clamped in their own parking spaces?

    Did we not talk about that further up? Though you'll have to clarify the situation seeing as Stark and Marlow are moving the goalposts. Is the estate more than 50% still builder owned?

    The people in the estate employ the clampers. They have the power to get rid of them.

    Drummerboy just gave you an example. Also, not everybody in an estate owns their home therefore does not have a say on the board of the.management company.


  • #671
    Drummerboy08
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,102 ✭✭✭✭Drummerboy08


    Guy:Incognito wrote: »
    I'm amazed it took so long.

    What took so long?


  • Advertisement
  • #672
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,244 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    MugMugs wrote: »
    Drummerboy just gave you an example. Also, not everybody in an estate owns their home therefore does not have a say on the board of the.management company.

    Someone owns the house. Are the landlords pro clampers?


  • #673
    MugMugs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,875 ✭✭✭✭MugMugs


    Anan1 wrote: »
    MugMugs wrote: »
    That's a harsh statement. He went to.get change.
    For 20 minutes? That's knowingly flouting the rules.

    Perspective. Any amount of things could have presented themself to the OP in that time. It's not all as clear cut.

    Are you a Clamper Anan1 ?


  • #674
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,196 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    Guy:Incognito wrote: »
    Someone owns the house. Are the landlords pro clampers?

    I sincerely hope that you're one day the victim of unfair clamping.


  • #675
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,244 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Stark wrote: »
    Care to justify the situation in Drummerboy's case of the clamping company clamping him because they didn't send out the permit in time? I suppose you expect him to just move out of home while he waits for them to get round to it.

    Care to justify your post diving on me and claiming I made things up?


  • #676
    MugMugs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,875 ✭✭✭✭MugMugs


    Guy:Incognito wrote: »
    MugMugs wrote: »
    Drummerboy just gave you an example. Also, not everybody in an estate owns their home therefore does not have a say on the board of the.management company.

    Someone owns the house. Are the landlords pro clampers?

    How pedantic is that statement?

    Who cares what the landlords view is? They aren't the victim.


  • #677
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,244 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Stark wrote: »
    I sincerely hope that you're one day the victim of unfair clamping.

    Whats that got to do with the homeowners employing the clampers and having the power to get rid of them?

    The OP was not unfairly clamped either.
    MugMugs wrote: »
    How pedantic is that statement?
    .

    Not at all?

    The peopel that own the estate want the clampers there. If your renting, dont rent somewhere that employs clampers if you dont want to. Theres no shortage of places to rent.


  • #678
    Anan1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,815 ✭✭✭✭Anan1


    Drummerboy - Do you honestly think that all clampers are the same, operating from some centralized bunker in the midlands? Has it ever occurred to you that just because you were clamped in the wrong it doesn't necessarily follow that the OP was too?


  • #679
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    Anan1 wrote: »
    For 20 minutes? That's knowingly flouting the rules.

    His intention was to pay. It took 20 minutes. Not really flouting. How do we know the clampers will wait even 1 minute, or 5, or 10?


  • #680
    Anan1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,815 ✭✭✭✭Anan1


    MugMugs wrote: »
    Are you a Clamper Anan1 ?
    Is this a serious question?
    robbie7730 wrote: »
    His intention was to pay. It took 20 minutes. Not really flouting. How do we know the clampers will wait even 1 minute, or 5, or 10?
    We all know they won't wait 20.


  • #681
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,244 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    MugMugs wrote: »
    Perspective. Any amount of things could have presented themself to the OP in that time. It's not all as clear cut.
    ?

    They didnt though. He chose to leave it there and go to the bank.


  • Advertisement
  • #682
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,196 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    Anan1 wrote: »
    Drummerboy - Do you honestly think that all clampers are the same, operating from some centralized bunker in the midlands? Has it ever occurred to you that just because you were clamped in the wrong it doesn't necessarily follow that the OP was too?

    I'm sure the company you work for are all cuddly and friendly. Still operating in the illegal extortion business though. It's like listening to someone from charity X complaining to all and sundry that "our chuggers aren't like that".


  • #683
    Marlow
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,555 ✭✭✭✭Marlow


    Anan1 wrote: »
    Drummerboy - Do you honestly think that all clampers are the same, operating from some centralized bunker in the midlands? Has it ever occurred to you that just because you were clamped in the wrong it doesn't necessarily follow that the OP was too?

    Well, in this very case both the OP and Drummerboy were clamped by the NCPS. But APCOA are actually worse as can be seen from various threads here and elsewhere.
    Anan1 wrote: »
    Is this a serious question?

    Matter of fact, yes.

    /M


  • #684
    MugMugs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,875 ✭✭✭✭MugMugs


    Guy:Incognito wrote: »
    Stark wrote: »
    I sincerely hope that you're one day the victim of unfair clamping.

    Whats that got to do with the homeowners employing the clampers and having the power to get rid of them?

    The OP was not unfairly clamped either.
    MugMugs wrote: »
    How pedantic is that statement?
    .

    Not at all?

    The peopel that own the estate want the clampers there. If your renting, dont rent somewhere that employs clampers if you dont want to. Theres no shortage of places to rent.

    And its so cut and dry isn't it? Why should you rent a home on the basis that you could be harrassed by a clamper? Why should you have to avoid them? If I.was renting a home frankly, is there a clamping service in operation would be the last thing going through my mind.


  • #685
    Drummerboy08
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,102 ✭✭✭✭Drummerboy08


    Guy:Incognito wrote: »
    Whats that got to do with the homeowners employing the clampers and having the power to get rid of them?

    The OP was not unfairly clamped either.

    To your first point, the clamping company are no longer employed in my estate, for various reasons. However, I had no say in this as I am only a tenant and do not have any contact with the management company.

    To your second, I genuinely believe that the OP was clamped unfairly. To have a clamp on your car within twenty minutes of parking up smacks of greed an opportunism on the behalf of the clamping company.

    IMO, there should be a grace period. Check the car, take note of the time, and details of the car and return 30 minutes later. If the car is still there with no ticket, then clamp away. If a ticket has been bought and is now on display then leave it alone.

    That is the fair way of doing it, and will allow for people who genuinely have been caught short for change to go and get cash and return to pay for the parking.


  • #686
    MugMugs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,875 ✭✭✭✭MugMugs


    Anan1 wrote: »
    MugMugs wrote: »
    Are you a Clamper Anan1 ?
    Is this a serious question?
    robbie7730 wrote: »
    His intention was to pay. It took 20 minutes. Not really flouting. How do we know the clampers will wait even 1 minute, or 5, or 10?
    We all know they won't wait 20.

    It is, aye.


  • #687
    BUBBLE WRAP
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,186 ✭✭✭BUBBLE WRAP


    Anan1 wrote: »
    Is this a serious question?.

    Is that your way of dodging the quistion?

    Or are you going to answer it?


  • #688
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    Anan1 wrote: »
    We all know they won't wait 20.

    Yes but if you have no change, and have to get some, and are delayed getting it, is that flouting the rules? As in intentionally not paying for parking?

    Did the op deliberately not pay to park?


  • #689
    MugMugs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,875 ✭✭✭✭MugMugs


    Guy:Incognito wrote: »
    MugMugs wrote: »
    Perspective. Any amount of things could have presented themself to the OP in that time. It's not all as clear cut.
    ?

    They didnt though. He chose to leave it there and go to the bank.

    He went to.get money to pay. Intent was there.


  • #690
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,244 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    MugMugs wrote: »
    And its so cut and dry isn't it? Why should you rent a home on the basis that you could be harrassed by a clamper? Why should you have to avoid them? If I.was renting a home frankly, is there a clamping service in operation would be the last thing going through my mind.

    Who said its on the basis of being harrassed. You dont agree with clamping as a rule, so dont rent a house that employs clampers , why would you?


  • Advertisement
  • #691
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,244 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Your awfull quick to jump on people Stark, not so quick to admit when your wrong though, eh?

    Stark wrote: »
    Typical fine for NCT is between €80 and €150 and has to be imposed by a judge in a court. I've never heard of anyone being charged the full €2000. People are giving fair warning before it goes that far. It's in no way comparable to a randomer making up a ridiculous fine and using extortion to obtain it from you.

    Typical fine my hole. You said the fine was €150 and I was makign figures up.
    Stark wrote: »
    It's €150 for not having your NCT disc displayed. You can't just make up silly figures when you actually need to pass laws in order to enforce them.


Advertisement