Clamped!

Anan1 · 14-09-2012 10:02AM

The Dagda wrote: »

Or maybe, you know, people simply don't like their own property being kidnapped, and held for ransom?

That's easily avoided by not placing their property on someone else's land.

Stark wrote: »

The problem is the pettiness such property owners (or is it long term leasers, hard to keep up, changes so often to suit the argument) respond with when someone (often legitimately there to purchase goods, visit friends, park in their "long term leased" space whatever) makes a minor slip up.

We'll see whether that's the real issue when we get regulated clamping. I believe that it is for you, but I think that for many it's just a fig leaf for selfishness.

username123 · 14-09-2012 10:35AM

Anan1 wrote: »

I've yet to see a poster here able to admit that they were legitimately clamped, even when they themselves tell us why. I don't think the problem is with the money, I think it's a sense of entitlement to do whatever they want on someone else's property.

Ive never actually been clamped, and I am one of those people who is courteous in terms of not parking in the 'parent and child' space (or any other makey uppy space) in supermarket car parks.

The way I feel about clamping is this:
If it is done by county councils (or companies leased by county councils) on public roads then its a harsh lesson, but fair enough, although I do think the declamping fee is too high. But there is a proper appeals process and the council is following the law.

Private company clamping on private property I am totally against for a number of reasons.

The declamping fee is too high (it can be set to any amount as far as I can tell).
There is no appeals process.
Its a grey area of law.
I do not agree that clamping is an appropriate punishment for say, not paying management fees, or someone parking in a parent and child space, or someone overstaying a visit by an hour.
The clampers traditionally are not professional to deal with and manys the tale where vulgar language is used 'eff off til you have the money' - this just brings them to the level of thugs imo.
Adding further extortionate fees per day to an already too high fee is simply blackmail and extortion - not only in my book but in the justice system of say, Scotland, who have outlawed the practice.
There are no alternatives. If you do not have money, hard cash, then they do not offer an alternative - I am quite sure there are cases where people go hungry or cannot pay a legitimate bill like esb due to being clamped.
Fundamentally - I am in favour of the castle doctrine, and I see my own private property as an extension of my castle. If the clampers were instead clamping peoples front doors there would be an uproar.

Anan1 · 14-09-2012 10:49AM

username123 wrote: »

Ive never actually been clamped, and I am one of those people who is courteous in terms of not parking in the 'parent and child' space (or any other makey uppy space) in supermarket car parks.

The way I feel about clamping is this:
If it is done by county councils (or companies leased by county councils) on public roads then its a harsh lesson, but fair enough, although I do think the declamping fee is too high. But there is a proper appeals process and the council is following the law.

Private company clamping on private property I am totally against for a number of reasons.
The declamping fee is too high (it can be set to any amount as far as I can tell).

There is no appeals process.

Its a grey area of law.

I do not agree that clamping is an appropriate punishment for say, not paying management fees, or someone parking in a parent and child space, or someone overstaying a visit by an hour.

The clampers traditionally are not professional to deal with and manys the tale where vulgar language is used 'eff off til you have the money' - this just brings them to the level of thugs imo.

Adding further extortionate fees per day to an already too high fee is simply blackmail and extortion - not only in my book but in the justice system of say, Scotland, who have outlawed the practice.

There are no alternatives. If you do not have money, hard cash, then they do not offer an alternative - I am quite sure there are cases where people go hungry or cannot pay a legitimate bill like esb due to being clamped.

Fundamentally - I am in favour of the castle doctrine, and I see my own private property as an extension of my castle. If the clampers were instead clamping peoples front doors there would be an uproar.

So you'd be OK with properly regulated clamping, clearly signposted and with access to a completely independent appeals process?

Re the castle doctrine, me too. But the castle is the car park, not the car.

username123 · 14-09-2012 12:03PM

Anan1 wrote: »

So you'd be OK with properly regulated clamping, clearly signposted and with access to a completely independent appeals process?

Yes.

Anan1 wrote: »

Re the castle doctrine, me too. But the castle is the car park, not the car.

I disagree. The car park is a public place (despite being owned as private property), it is not an individuals private property for use by that individual only in the manner in which a car or a residential property is.

Anan1 · 14-09-2012 12:22PM

username123 wrote: »

Yes.

Me too.

username123 wrote: »

I disagree. The car park is a public place (despite being owned as private property), it is not an individuals private property for use by that individual only in the manner in which a car or a residential property is.

I think that's a legal, rather than a moral, argument. Bottom line - if people respected the property rights of others then there would be no need for clamping. When we freely park our car on land we know belongs to someone else then IMO the castle doctrine cannot apply in spirit.

username123 · 14-09-2012 12:33PM

Anan1 wrote: »

I think that's a legal, rather than a moral, argument. Bottom line - if people respected the property rights of others then there would be no need for clamping. When we freely park our car on land we know belongs to someone else then IMO the castle doctrine cannot apply in spirit.

If a properly regulated system with fair charges and an independent appeals process was in operation, I would probably be happy to accept clamping on private property by a private company also. I wouldnt like it, but I would agree that its fair.

But what happens today is totally unfair, unregulated, extortionate and comparable to a kangaroo court - which I do not agree with.

Anan1 · 14-09-2012 12:37PM

username123 wrote: »

But what happens today is totally unfair, unregulated, extortionate and comparable to a kangaroo court - which I do not agree with.

I'm sure it can be, but i'm also sure that plenty of landowners are at their wits end trying to legitimately protect their spaces against drivers with no respect for the rights of others.

Like you said, we urgently need legislation.

username123 · 14-09-2012 12:48PM

Anan1 wrote: »

I'm sure it can be, but i'm also sure that plenty of landowners are at their wits end trying to legitimately protect their spaces against drivers with no respect for the rights of others.

Like you said, we urgently need legislation.

Thats it in a nutshell actually Anan1 - you cannot ever legitimately protect your property by resorting to kangaroo court means - so imo private property/private company clamping can never be justified.

Anan1 · 14-09-2012 12:55PM

username123 wrote: »

Thats it in a nutshell actually Anan1 - you cannot ever legitimately protect your property by resorting to kangaroo court means - so imo private property/private company clamping can never be justified.

Can wilfully disregarding the wishes of the landowner when parking on their property be justified? Because right now, unregulated private clamping is the only defence against this that many landowners have. Would you really throw these people to the wolves?

username123 · 14-09-2012 03:21PM

Anan1 wrote: »

Can wilfully disregarding the wishes of the landowner when parking on their property be justified? Because right now, unregulated private clamping is the only defence against this that many landowners have. Would you really throw these people to the wolves?

No (not justified), but yes (throw to the wolves). I agree its not great, but unregulated kangaroo court extortion is the greater evil - imo.

Dr.Winston O'Boogie · 15-09-2012 10:08AM

Well victory is mine. Went around yesterday to get stuff out of my car, and the clamp was gone!

I rang them on Wednesday night, told them that I don't need my car, will never pay the declamp fee, its worth nearly half the sale value of the car. Your man on the phone was stuttering a bit, told me I had to pay the fee, I said I only have to pay if I ever need my car, which I won't for a long time, if ever. I asked him to look at the photos they took of the car when clamping (I know they do this as proof of invalid permits etc) to prove my argument that the declamp value vs car value is just not worth it. He told me he needs to check what happens if I never pay, and to ring back Thursday. I didn't.

Then it was gone yesterday, not sure what happened in between but I reckon they weighed it up and decided they needed their clamp far more than I needed my car.

Yawns · 15-09-2012 10:47AM

Yeah typically what happens is they remove it for use on another car. The clamp sitting on a car where the owner will not pay is useless to them. They hold out for a few days to pressure the car owner but if you don't need the car, play them at their own game.

They cannot have your car removed in any circumstance. They only card they can play is to clamp the car. The car owner has many more cards to play rather than folding at the beginning.

username123 · 15-09-2012 12:06PM

niallo24 wrote: »

Well victory is mine. Went around yesterday to get stuff out of my car, and the clamp was gone!

Well done OP - delighted to hear. Its another example of the illegitimacy of the practice that if they cannot extort money, they take away the clamp.

Anan1 · 15-09-2012 01:40PM

username123 wrote: »

No (not justified), but yes (throw to the wolves). I agree its not great, but unregulated kangaroo court extortion is the greater evil - imo.

And that's where we'll have to agree to differ.

username123 · 15-09-2012 04:04PM

Anan1 wrote: »

And that's where we'll have to agree to differ.

Two wrongs dont make a right?
The lesser of two evils?

Cant think of a fully appropriate saying lol!

But we do agree it needs regulation.

Edited to add - Ive been thinking about this and I think if it was private property that wasnt a public place (so your back garden for example), Id support the landowner. But for car parks (both at shops and housing developments) - I think the person parking when they shouldnt is the less bad thing than clamping.

Anan1 · 15-09-2012 06:19PM

username123 wrote: »

Two wrongs dont make a right?
The lesser of two evils?

Cant think of a fully appropriate saying lol!

But we do agree it needs regulation.

Edited to add - Ive been thinking about this and I think if it was private property that wasnt a public place (so your back garden for example), Id support the landowner. But for car parks (both at shops and housing developments) - I think the person parking when they shouldnt is the less bad thing than clamping.

We're not that far apart, most of the con saw brigade simply cover their ears when the issue of landowner rights is raised. How about numbered (ie privately owned) spaces in a residential development? Or driveways?

username123 · 16-09-2012 02:13PM

Anan1 wrote: »

We're not that far apart, most of the con saw brigade simply cover their ears when the issue of landowner rights is raised. How about numbered (ie privately owned) spaces in a residential development? Or driveways?

Numbered spaces and driveways - yes, but not visitors spaces that are 'public'. A numbered space is the same as your driveway imo.

McCrack · 16-09-2012 09:48PM

niallo24 wrote: »

Well victory is mine. Went around yesterday to get stuff out of my car, and the clamp was gone!

I rang them on Wednesday night, told them that I don't need my car, will never pay the declamp fee, its worth nearly half the sale value of the car. Your man on the phone was stuttering a bit, told me I had to pay the fee, I said I only have to pay if I ever need my car, which I won't for a long time, if ever. I asked him to look at the photos they took of the car when clamping (I know they do this as proof of invalid permits etc) to prove my argument that the declamp value vs car value is just not worth it. He told me he needs to check what happens if I never pay, and to ring back Thursday. I didn't.

Then it was gone yesterday, not sure what happened in between but I reckon they weighed it up and decided they needed their clamp far more than I needed my car.

Well done, this is a lesson for others. NEVER pay a clamp release fee to a private company. Cut the clamp or wait it out. A clamp on a car for days with no prospect of the owner paying is a clamp they cannot use to extort from others.

If enough victims of this practice play these f"ckheads at their own game they will fold. At the end of the day their survival is dependent on clamp release revenue.

Good work niallo

Buyingcar2012 · 16-09-2012 10:03PM

What do you think about the following:

We have an apartment with a designated parking spot in an underground car park. The third underground level is all residential while level 1 and 2 are public.

We recently got a second car and parked it in an empty space(never saw a car there in 4 years) in the residential area. This worked out fine for a few months until recently when someone asked us to move from the spot. There still isn't any car there so I presume the owners just does a spot check now and again.

We have now put the 2nd car in the public car park and it hasn't been detected yet. It is not a busy car park and is usually about two thirds empty.

Just wondering what your advice would be if it got clamped?

Tallon · 16-09-2012 10:06PM

Take off the clamp if it gets clamped

Buyingcar2012 · 16-09-2012 11:10PM

Tallon wrote: »

Take off the clamp if it gets clamped

Would that not be criminal damage? Would it better to just wait it out and hope they take off the clamp?

Supergurrier · 16-09-2012 11:11PM

Buy Elbach lowering springs and fit 19 inch wheels, never get clamped again

BUBBLE WRAP · 16-09-2012 11:16PM

Supergurrier wrote: »

Buy Elbach lowering springs and fit 19 inch wheels, never get clamped again

I'm sure they would find away. :rolleyes:

Tallon · 16-09-2012 11:22PM

Buyingcar2012 wrote: »

Would that not be criminal damage? Would it better to just wait it out and hope they take off the clamp?

Criminal damage only applies, if you actually 'damage' it!

jhegarty · 16-09-2012 11:39PM

Buyingcar2012 wrote: »

What do you think about the following:

....

Just wondering what your advice would be if it got clamped?

Depends, how do you feel about balloons ?

darragh o meara · 17-09-2012 02:52AM

Supergurrier wrote: »

Buy Elbach lowering springs and fit 19 inch wheels, never get clamped again

I wouldnt say never, know a few lads in college who tried that and the crafty still got clamped. They just put the chain through the spokes of the rim.

A good idea if you think your gonna be clamped is to park the car with the wheels locked to one side, a lot of the time they won't be able to get it on and putting it on the back wheel makes it very easy to remove as there is generally no wishbone to wrap the chain around

Tallon · 17-09-2012 03:12AM

Turning your wheel would make it Easier to clamp...

senordingdong · 17-09-2012 09:44AM

Buyingcar2012 wrote: »

Would that not be criminal damage? Would it better to just wait it out and hope they take off the clamp?

I think we are going to need to sticky this point to stop repeating it...you can remove the clamp without damaging it by jacking the car up and taking the wheel off. Some people prefer the speedy option of cutting the lock or chain, so that in the extremely unlikely event of being charged with criminal damage, you would only have to replace the price of a chain or lock. Some however, are more brazen, and reckon that cutting it is a perfectly defendable and justifable way to free your car from an illeagal immobilisation as a result of illegal intereference with their vehicle.

senordingdong · 18-10-2012 11:47AM

Surely by now, someone could have invented something to put on your wheel to prevent them from getting at it?

guttenberg · 18-10-2012 11:57AM

senordingdong wrote: »

Surely by now, someone could have invented something to put on your wheel to prevent them from getting at it?

Yup, clamp all the wheels yourself so they can't attach theirs;)

Clamped!

Comments