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

Clamped in my own parking space

Options
1356

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Our man in Havana
    Closed Accounts Posts: 29,476 ✭✭✭✭Our man in Havana


    So have you provision in case of being sued for engaging such gangsters?


  • Options
    #63
    Motorist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 892 ✭✭✭Motorist


    fasttalkerchat wrote: »
    No. It only ever went to court once and the driver won.

    If you are cutting a lock give them your details so it becomes a civil matter. Give them back their clamp and offer to buy a new lock.

    To be safe its better to avoid cutting the lock at all but this will not always be possible if you're clamped away from home or have to be somewhere.

    That's the only approach unless you're a complete mug. Play these scumbags at their own game.


  • Options
    #64
    athtrasna
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,420 ✭✭✭✭athtrasna


    Motorist wrote: »
    Your research decided to bring in APCOA based on release fees? Are you trying to suggest that other clamping companies have a release fee of greater than €120, or were you just going for the most punitive fee available? What database did you use to examine "reaction times" of various clamping companies?

    "Unfortunate" indeed the OP's case, as are many others who have the misfortunate of dealing with this company you chose to bring in.

    If you read my posts you would see that the clamping company used to charge us an annual fee for providing the service. This was waived when they increased the clamping fee.

    I don't see why you're being so aggressive with me, it's very simple. If there are rules regarding parking, obey them and you won't have any trouble. Same as any other rules.

    As for people saying the APCOA appeals fee is the last resort, how about http://www.ipas.ie/about.htm - do they have the power to make binding rulings?


  • Options
    #65
    augustus gloop
    Registered Users Posts: 810 ✭✭✭augustus gloop


    hammer+cold chisel break the chain link at the welds onto the plate.
    Cut the link off and get it rewelded.
    No problemmo


  • Options
    #66
    Our man in Havana
    Closed Accounts Posts: 29,476 ✭✭✭✭Our man in Havana


    how about http://www.ipas.ie/about.htm - do they have the power to make binding rulings?

    LOL!

    They are about as independent as Enda Kenny is to FG. IPAS is wholly owned and run by guess who? The clampers.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Motorist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 892 ✭✭✭Motorist


    athtrasna wrote: »
    It is a deterrent, people know if they clamp anywhere other than a space, they will be clamped. We didn't bring it in that night, it was what showed us how someone being inconsiderate and ignoring the rules actually put someone's life at risk, so onus was on us to take action to enforce the rule.
    .

    Im surprised APCOA didn't clamp the ambulance while the paramedics were attending to the patient.


  • Options
    #68
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,269 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    Cut the clamp, or pay the fine and take the mc to the small claims court for the loss incurred by you to a sub contractor for not providing a sticker fit for its purpose.


  • Options
    #69
    Motorist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 892 ✭✭✭Motorist


    athtrasna wrote: »
    If you read my posts you would see that the clamping company used to charge us an annual fee for providing the service. This was waived when they increased the clamping fee.

    If there are rules regarding parking, obey them and you won't have any trouble. Same as any other rules.


    At least you admit that you hired the cheapest scumbags on offer even though you have found them to be aggressive - no fee to management.

    Would you advocate a garda pull over a speeding motorist driving someone having a medical emergency to a hospital? Rules are rules afterall.


  • Options
    #70
    rat_race
    Registered Users Posts: 983 ✭✭✭rat_race


    Mikros wrote: »
    Thank you for that. Between the general legal issues in that article and the fact that it is "my" parking space I think there is a strong case to be made. Unfortunately I need the car for Thursday!

    I will be raising the issue again with the Management Company - this situation should simply not be allowed happen for a bona fide mistake by a resident who has paid their fees. It's not good enough to just wash their hands of it. Apcoa are engaging in simple extortion - the €120 charge per 24 hours cannot be justified.

    I may ultimately have to pay the charge tomorrow, appeal and if (when) not successful talk to a solicitor.

    Wow...You've spent so much time and energy dealing with something you do not deserve. And life is short.

    If this was me, I'd have told them my intentions: give them a generous 24 hours to remove, or I'd remove it myself -- and I'd be removing it by whichever means was fastest; probably a grinder. What if you had needed the car? What if you had lost earnings? What if your wife was pregnant and due very soon?

    Etc., etc. If you remove it, leave it there. You will never hear anything about it again. It's not worth their while pursueing it, and you're totally in the right. Stand up for yourself...it isn't hard to remove these things.


  • Options
    #71
    athtrasna
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,420 ✭✭✭✭athtrasna


    Motorist wrote: »
    athtrasna wrote: »
    If you read my posts you would see that the clamping company used to charge us an annual fee for providing the service. This was waived when they increased the clamping fee.

    If there are rules regarding parking, obey them and you won't have any trouble. Same as any other rules.


    At least you admit that you hired the cheapest scumbags on offer even though you have found them to be aggressive - no fee to management.

    Would you advocate a garda pull over a speeding motorist driving someone having a medical emergency to a hospital? Rules are rules afterall.

    I give up, you clearly want to make up your own story. All our contracts are renewed and put to tender annually. I've told you the aggression is new, the contract had already been renewed before the management change. Will review the situation at budget time.

    In answer to your other question yes, and give them an escort to the hospital!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    athtrasna
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,420 ✭✭✭✭athtrasna


    Motorist wrote: »
    athtrasna wrote: »
    It is a deterrent, people know if they clamp anywhere other than a space, they will be clamped. We didn't bring it in that night, it was what showed us how someone being inconsiderate and ignoring the rules actually put someone's life at risk, so onus was on us to take action to enforce the rule.
    .

    Im surprised APCOA didn't clamp the ambulance while the paramedics were attending to the patient.

    It was pre-buyout


  • Options
    #73
    fasttalkerchat
    Registered Users Posts: 5,652 ✭✭✭fasttalkerchat


    athtrasna wrote: »
    I give up, you clearly want to make up your own story. All our contracts are renewed and put to tender annually. I've told you the aggression is new, the contract had already been renewed before the management change. Will review the situation at budget time.

    In answer to your other question yes, and give them an escort to the hospital!

    If there is no money changing hands is there a monetary penalty for terminating the contract?


  • Options
    #74
    Paulw
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 13,381 Mod ✭✭✭✭Paulw


    Mikros wrote: »
    My membership of the management company is separate to the ownership of my car. Any contract in place between the management company and Apcoa cannot supersede my separate property rights. Apcoa can bill for the release fee but they cannot hold my car in lieu because they have no lawful claim on it.

    Your ownership of your car is not in question. The use of the parking space is governed by the terms and conditions as laid out by the management company, which now includes displaying of a parking permit. On the date in question, as you have stated, your permit was not on display, and hence you were clamped.

    I know and understand how frustrated you are. With regards to APCOA sending you a bill because you believe they can't hold your car in lieu, the only way for that to be clarified in law would be for you, or someone, to take a case to court.
    kkelliher wrote: »
    I could be wrong but as far as i am aware the clampers pay the management company a yearly fee for right to clamp and they then get the monies from any clamping charges therefore there is nor reason for them to payout on appeals.

    In the majority of cases, you are incorrect. I am not aware of any development where the clampers pay a management company, but I know most developments pay the clampers to enforce parking.


  • Options
    #75
    Mikros
    Registered Users Posts: 498 ✭✭Mikros


    Paulw wrote: »
    Your ownership of your car is not in question. The use of the parking space is governed by the terms and conditions as laid out by the management company, which now includes displaying of a parking permit. On the date in question, as you have stated, your permit was not on display, and hence you were clamped.

    I know and understand how frustrated you are. With regards to APCOA sending you a bill because you believe they can't hold your car in lieu, the only way for that to be clarified in law would be for you, or someone, to take a case to court.

    Paulw, without getting too legal, there is no basis in law for a 3rd party to continue exercise control over my property inconsistent with my rights of possession. To me it sounds like a common tort of conversion and is actionable. It is questionable if the management company can even clamp in the space irrespective of whether I have a permit or not. Given I hold the legal rights to sole and exclusive use of the space - no later contract the MC enters into can supersede that. It is the exact same principle if the MC decided to put an extra lock on my apartment door for not paying fees. Again my membership of the management company is separate from my own property rights. If someone owes me money I cannot simply go to their house and take their car - neither can a clamping company. As you said it would have to be tested in court but I believe the legal principles are pretty clear.

    The release fee now stands at €360 + €5 service charge.

    Thank you people for your advice and opinions. I will have this resolved by this evening (one way or another) and will let you know the outcome. I cant waste any more time on it for now.


  • Options
    #76
    kkelliher
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators Posts: 1,583 Mod ✭✭✭✭kkelliher


    Paulw wrote: »
    Your ownership of your car is not in question. The use of the parking space is governed by the terms and conditions as laid out by the management company, which now includes displaying of a parking permit. On the date in question, as you have stated, your permit was not on display, and hence you were clamped.

    Technically a grey area. Your use of the parking space is giverned by your lease agreement with the management company. This would have been signed on purchase of the apartment originally.

    The management company have altered this to include for parking permit and clamping but does the agreement of few result in the altering of a contract between two individual parties.......I would say No


  • Options
    #77
    galwaytt
    Registered Users Posts: 12,761 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    djimi wrote: »
    .... the minute they learned that the OP was parked in the space legally they should have had someone out to remove the clamp. ......The management company hire clampers to deal with cars who are parked illegally and should not be parked there......

    And that's the problem, right there: using the word 'legal' and 'illegal'. OP has stated, if I read it correctly, (
    Mikros wrote: »
    ..Our Management company agreed to bring in a parking permit system ...... This was in order to force people to pay their fees
    - so it has nothing to do with parking at all, actually. This is just a mechanism to force people to pay up 'general' MC fees. In which case, it's simple: it's extortion. Holding his vehicle illegally, to force payment of fees. If that alone doesn't deserve a day in court, I don't know what does.
    athtrasna wrote: »
    For your information we brought in clamping when an ambulance crew struggled to access a house because of cars illegally parked across the row of houses - we did it for safety. We would get rid of clamping altogether if people played by the rules but judging by other behaviour of some tenants, that's unlikely to happen.

    Our management company is the legal entity comprising all owners in the development. It owns all common areas including the car parks. We are far from powerless. It was the owners who voted in clamping in the first place. If any clamping company clamp outside their contract, they would be bound to waive the release fee.

    The OP's case is unfortunate. It would be interesting to know if the permits are logged against registrations and APCOA had a mechanism to check if the vehicle belonged to an owner with a permit, or if parking is purely down to the display of a permit.

    And that's the problem, right there: using the word 'legal' and 'illegal', incorrectly.

    First of all, people parking in contravention of an MC rule are not parking 'illegally'. Legal, or illegal for that matter, implies the rule or enforcemet of law, and in a private development you don't have that. Not any more than I do by buying a can of yellow paint and deciding to paint two lines on my drive and clamping all the visitors.
    Secondly, neither a clamping company, nor a management company have ANY right whatsoever, to clamp a car. Doing so is in direct breach of the Road Traffic Act 1961, Section 113. So, at the very least, I hope MC's (e.g. Athtrasna's one) as the employing agent engaging in the clamping, has not only got legal backing for it, but similarly, is legally insured, or has an appropriately large sinking fund to cover legal costs when you (eventually) get taken to court for breach of the above Act.

    athtrasna wrote: »
    As for making money, are you joking? Nobody in this development, or our management agent makes a cent out of any of our contractors. In fact, all owner directors work for free in our "spare time" to ensure that the development is a pleasant place to live and to own in. Directors are elected by the owners at each AGM. There is nothing in it for any of us other than to protect our investments by ensuring the development is well maintained.
    I appreciate you personally, and the MC don't get any money from the clamping per-se, but you are facilitiating and endorsing the extortion of monies on spurious grounds from people, by dint of you employing the clampers. You are, therefore, culpable, and can't wash your hands of it.
    athtrasna wrote: »
    All our contracts are renewed and put to tender annually.
    When you do award contracts, they should be on your terms, and in accordance with your wishes - not just 'taking on' existing companies practices 'cos that's the way they always do it'. Again, if clampers are acting on your authority, then their behaviour is attributable to you, somewhat akin to 'employers liability'.

    Ode To The Motorist

    “And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road” 



  • Options
    #78
    jhegarty
    Registered Users Posts: 6,434 ✭✭✭jhegarty


    The car is now legally parked (permit in place).

    So in this case the clamper have a clamp in place purely to enforce a debt.

    This is 100% illegal.


  • Options
    #79
    galwaytt
    Registered Users Posts: 12,761 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    Mikros wrote: »
    The whole thing seems like a scam and out of principle they wont get a cent from me. I don't need the car for the moment so I've just left it there. Any suggestions on how to get Apcoa to budge?

    OP, enlist the help of the Motors section, and get the clamp off yourself. Do not pay APCOA a cent. Take pictures. If anyone turns up, take their picture, and get their names/badge/id numbers, and make a note of time and date of all and everything. If they mention 'getting the Garda', then offer to call them yourself, because I can guarantee you, that when AGS come out, and see you remove the clamp without damaging it, that they will tell APCOA to be on their merry way as it is a 'Civil Matter'.

    I'd also send a letter to the MC telling them they are operating outside the law, and that any further attempt to interfere with your vehicle, on any grounds, will result in legal action.

    Ode To The Motorist

    “And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road” 



  • Options
    #80
    galwaytt
    Registered Users Posts: 12,761 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    kkelliher wrote: »
    Technically a grey area. Your use of the parking space is giverned by your lease agreement with the management company. This would have been signed on purchase of the apartment originally.

    The management company have altered this to include for parking permit and clamping but does the agreement of few result in the altering of a contract between two individual parties.......I would say No

    ...indeed it is a grey area. I have a house in an MC area, and the parking in mine is in the Deed of the property, so the MC can't make up ANY rules, of any kind, off the top of their head - they have no backing in Law.

    Ode To The Motorist

    “And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road” 



  • Options
    #81
    Paulw
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 13,381 Mod ✭✭✭✭Paulw


    Mikros wrote: »
    As you said it would have to be tested in court but I believe the legal principles are pretty clear.

    I am not disagreeing with you at all. But yes, it needs to be tested in court for it to be black and white. This has never happened, so it is a massive area of contention. While the principle is clear, the law isn't.
    galwaytt wrote: »
    I'd also send a letter to the MC telling them they are operating outside the law, and that any further attempt to interfere with your vehicle, on any grounds, will result in legal action.

    The OP is part of the management company, so any legal action against the management company would also be action against himself. If the OP is opposed to clamping (he hasn't stated this at all), then the issue should be raised at the next company AGM, and discussed. Most likely this has been raised at an AGM and the members voted to bring in clamping. That's usually how it's done. The management agent is then tasked with hiring a clamping company, such as APCOA or NCPS.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    jd
    Registered Users Posts: 5,681 ✭✭✭jd


    AFAIK, one of the owners where we are was a refused an injunction against the management company and ncps. His parking permits had been withdrawn.(refusal to pay charges). It wasn't reported - if you do a search for "Nationwide Controlled Parking Systems Limited" on http://www.courts.ie you should see a mention of it under Judge's Motions, I think..


  • Options
    #83
    Dionysius2
    Registered Users Posts: 342 ✭✭Dionysius2


    Suppose I absolutely need my car when it is clamped in contentious circumstances and I decide to hire a car to do the essential work I needed my car for.......and I claim the cost of the car hire from Clampers & Co......what chance do I have of recouping my outlay ?
    Just to be nice and reasonable (and never forget that the basis of all law is reason ! ) I would give C & Co say 3 hours notice of my intention to hire a vehicle thereby giving them an opportunity to release my car.


  • Options
    #84
    getz
    Registered Users Posts: 5,255 ✭✭✭getz


    if it was me,the clamp would go missing overnight,and never be found,so its sorry officer but when i got up this morning there was no clamp on my car so i thought the clamping company had a change of heart and removed it.let them prove different


  • Options
    #85
    convert
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 9,338 Mod ✭✭✭✭convert


    getz wrote: »
    if it was me,the clamp would go missing overnight,and never be found,so its sorry officer but when i got up this morning there was no clamp on my car so i thought the clamping company had a change of heart and removed it.let them prove different

    CCTV?


  • Options
    #86
    athtrasna
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,420 ✭✭✭✭athtrasna


    galwaytt wrote: »
    First of all, people parking in contravention of an MC rule are not parking 'illegally'. Legal, or illegal for that matter, implies the rule or enforcemet of law, and in a private development you don't have that.

    I hope MC's (e.g. Athtrasna's one) as the employing agent engaging in the clamping, has not only got legal backing for it, but similarly, is legally insured, or has an appropriately large sinking fund to cover legal costs when you (eventually) get taken to court for breach of the above Act.


    I appreciate you personally, and the MC don't get any money from the clamping per-se, but you are facilitiating and endorsing the extortion of monies on spurious grounds from people, by dint of you employing the clampers. You are, therefore, culpable, and can't wash your hands of it.

    In this case they were parking illegally according to the road traffic act as they were directly blocking access to the houses.

    The management company brought in clamping, that in effect means that every owner in the development brought in clamping - so there is no extortion as you put it. Each unit is reminded regularly of the parking rules and clamping is actually very rare in the development now. There is no problem with it, no spurious grounds - you park in a space, you don't get clamped. We don't have permits so the OP's situation would not arise here.


  • Options
    #87
    Mikros
    Registered Users Posts: 498 ✭✭Mikros


    jd wrote: »
    AFAIK, one of the owners where we are was a refused an injunction against the management company and ncps. His parking permits had been withdrawn.(refusal to pay charges). It wasn't reported - if you do a search for "Nationwide Controlled Parking Systems Limited" on http://www.courts.ie you should see a mention of it under Judge's Motions, I think..

    I wasn't able to find that on courts.ie - if you have a link I would be interested in reading it. Of course my case is different in that I have paid my fees and am in good standing with the management company.

    I know I could cut it off and be done with it. There is a principle involved though and I want to see it out for now.

    And the principle is pretty simple as I see it - it is a tort of trespass on my chattel. Based on the 3 elements:

    1. Lack of consent: The interference with my property is without my consent. A contract between the management company and a clamping company does not impose a contractual obligation on me outside those as set out in my leasehold which I am in compliance with. The management company by vote or otherwise cannot change my leasehold conditions without my explicit consent which I have not provided.

    2. Actual harm: The interference with my vehicle has prevented my lawful use of it and disrupted my life.

    3. Intentionality: The interference is clearly intentional.

    I will be instructing a solicitor tomorrow assuming the clamp is still there later. I've put the MC on notice of this. I will rent a car if needs be.


  • Options
    #88
    getz
    Registered Users Posts: 5,255 ✭✭✭getz


    Mikros wrote: »
    I wasn't able to find that on courts.ie - if you have a link I would be interested in reading it. Of course my case is different in that I have paid my fees and am in good standing with the management company.

    I know I could cut it off and be done with it. There is a principle involved though and I want to see it out for now.

    And the principle is pretty simple as I see it - it is a tort of trespass on my chattel. Based on the 3 elements:

    1. Lack of consent: The interference with my property is without my consent. A contract between the management company and a clamping company does not impose a contractual obligation on me outside those as set out in my leasehold which I am in compliance with. The management company by vote or otherwise cannot change my leasehold conditions without my explicit consent which I have not provided.

    2. Actual harm: The interference with my vehicle has prevented my lawful use of it and disrupted my life.

    3. Intentionality: The interference is clearly intentional.

    I will be instructing a solicitor tomorrow assuming the clamp is still there later. I've put the MC on notice of this. I will rent a car if needs be.
    maybe sue for your loss of earnings


  • Options
    #89
    Paulw
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 13,381 Mod ✭✭✭✭Paulw


    getz wrote: »
    maybe sue for your loss of earnings

    You would to prove loss of earnings. The OP seems smart enough not to make false claims, nor commit a crime, such as criminal damage.


  • Options
    #90
    Stark
    Registered Users Posts: 20,894 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    athtrasna wrote: »
    Like I said, there has been a change in the management of the company in the last few months and there has been a huge change in how aggressive they are.

    It was 2 years ago when I lived in an APCOA managed apartment complex and they were extremely aggressive back then (woke up one morning to find my car clamped even though it was parked correctly and simply got a "we're sorry this happened to you" PFO in response to appeal, as well as several incidents of them changing the rules on the visitor parking signs during the night and guests waking up to clamped cars). Can't see what would have changed.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    getz
    Registered Users Posts: 5,255 ✭✭✭getz


    Paulw wrote: »
    You would to prove loss of earnings. The OP seems smart enough not to make false claims, nor commit a crime, such as criminal damage.
    i am sure if he has had to hire a car or pay to get to work on a bus or train because of the clamping company, that will be easy to prove,


Advertisement