Introduction of clamping in Charlesland Crescent and Wood

mirekb · 20-02-2013 12:07am

matt-dublin wrote: »

nope im saying that we will have access to a database and when someone stops engaging the management company we will revoke their pass which will be paired with their reg plate.

I don't think you can make people register their license plates with you. I'm pretty sure that falls under our data protection laws. Can you please explain how this is legal?

mirekb · 20-02-2013 12:12am

matt-dublin wrote: »

If they don't provide their regs they'll get clamped by default!!

How would you know the car parked outside my house isn't a visitor or a tradesman? Or my neighbours - they have 3 cars and one spot..

Annasopra · 20-02-2013 12:22am

mirekb wrote: »

How would you know the car parked outside my house isn't a visitor or a tradesman? Or my neighbours - they have 3 cars and one spot..

This would apply if your management fees are not paid!

mirekb · 20-02-2013 12:24am

mango salsa wrote: »

This would apply if your management fees are not paid!

I rent, so, if my landlord hasn't paid the fees a passing tradesman, visitor, neighbour could get clamped? That's going to go down very well! (I am sure he pays the fees btw, this is hypothetical

)

I have asked over on the legal discussion forum to see what they say.

Annasopra · 20-02-2013 12:27am

mirekb wrote: »

I rent, so, if my landlord hasn't paid the fees a passing tradesman, visitor, neighbour could get clamped? That's going to go down very well! (I am sure he pays the fees btw, this is hypothetical )

Yeah well if your landlord isn't paying the fees, I'm sure that goes down well with your neighbours who are subsidising him.

mirekb · 20-02-2013 12:31am

mango salsa wrote: »

Yeah well if your landlord isn't paying the fees, I'm sure that goes down well with your neighbours who are subsidising him.

Yes, I agree absolutely that the fees must be paid - I am arguing the legality of clamping vehicles of unknown ownership on private property. If I were to be clamped because my landlord hadn't paid then I wouldn't be bringing him to the circuit court, but the person who had clamped me on private property.

matt-dublin · 20-02-2013 12:32am

mirekb wrote: »

How would you know the car parked outside my house isn't a visitor or a tradesman? Or my neighbours - they have 3 cars and one spot..

Visitors will be able to call or txt their reg number to ncps for 24 hours parking. If they don't they will get clamped. If they use it daily or abuse it they will be clamped.

matt-dublin · 20-02-2013 12:34am

mirekb wrote: »

Yes, I agree absolutely that the fees must be paid - I am arguing the legality of clamping vehicles of unknown ownership on private property. If I were to be clamped because my landlord hadn't paid then I wouldn't be bringing him to the circuit court, but the person who had clamped me on private property.

It's perfectly legal and plenty of management companies do it at the moment. Perfect example is all of the apartments on the way to dundrum town centre from the m50, they all have the same system

You would be able to seek the fine back off your landlord by way of rent reduction. If your landlord isn't paying for the services you use the. You shouldn't be allowed to use them (bins/parking)

mirekb · 20-02-2013 12:36am

matt-dublin wrote: »

Visitors will be able to call or txt their reg number to ncps for 24 hours parking. If they don't they will get clamped. If they use it daily or abuse it they will be clamped.

See my next post, I just copped

mirekb · 20-02-2013 12:38am

matt-dublin wrote: »

It's perfectly legal and plenty of management companies do it at the moment. Perfect example is all of the apartments on the way to dundrum town centre from the m50, they all have the same system

You would be able to seek the fine back off your landlord by way of rent reduction. If your landlord isn't paying for the services you use the. You shouldn't be allowed to use them (bins/parking)

Ah, I understand now - we need a resident's sticker, so. But I still don't think you can clamp a car in someone's driveway.

Can management companies decide this now the estate has been handed over to the council?

matt-dublin · 20-02-2013 12:41am

mirekb wrote: »

Ah, I understand now - we need a resident's sticker, so. But I still don't think you can clamp a car in someone's driveway

Where's the driveway? Also that information isn't data protected. Only names, phone numbers, email address, addreses etc is really covered data protection. You can't use a car registration to steal someone's identity

This is in the crescent car park.

mirekb · 20-02-2013 12:44am

matt-dublin wrote: »

By the looks it if clamping will be coming into all areas I. Charlesland to control management fees and abuse of car Parking spaces

I read this as all of Charlesland - sorry

matt-dublin · 20-02-2013 12:45am

mirekb wrote: »

Ah, I understand now - we need a resident's sticker, so. But I still don't think you can clamp a car in someone's driveway.

Can management companies decide this now the estate has been handed over to the council?

The estate hasn't been handed over, only the spine road. Which can now be ticketed by the parking warden. I suspect this will start happening soon with people parking near junctions, on the zebra crossing (tonight!!) and sometimes even on the roundabout.

mirekb · 20-02-2013 12:49am

matt-dublin wrote: »

The estate hasn't been handed over, only the spine road. Which can now be ticketed by the parking warden. I suspect this will start happening soon with people parking near junctions, on the zebra crossing (tonight!!) and sometimes even on the roundabout.

And those who park up on the bike paths too, please!

eleMental · 21-02-2013 12:05am

mirekb wrote: »

And those who park up on the bike paths too, please!

YES!!! the people on the RHS as you drive into the entrance of Charlesland who REPEATEDLY for years drive up and over the grass (which gets destroyed with mud in winter) and park along the bike path really need to get a ticket or two. Pity they cant be clamped, the unclamping fee would help pay towards the incremental landscaping required to restore the grass area they destroy....:mad:

Maudi · 21-02-2013 12:31am

eleMental wrote: »

YES!!! the people on the RHS as you drive into the entrance of Charlesland who REPEATEDLY for years drive up and over the grass (which gets destroyed with mud in winter) and park along the bike path really need to get a ticket or two. Pity they cant be clamped, the unclamping fee would help pay towards the incremental landscaping required to restore the grass area they destroy....:mad:

the cnuts that park on cycle lane /path then drive off and tear the grass up..they really p.ss me off!!!clamp each fkn wheel on these cars..actually tow them away would be a better idea seeing as the cars appear to be "abandoned" on the foothpath.

youknowwho · 21-02-2013 3:25pm

Maudi wrote: »

the cnuts that park on cycle lane /path then drive off and tear the grass up..they really p.ss me off!!!clamp each fkn wheel on these cars..actually tow them away would be a better idea seeing as the cars appear to be "abandoned" on the foothpath.

Call the guards. Now that the Spine Rd has been taken in charge it's a public road and I understand that in recent changes to the penalty point scheme parking on a cycletracks attracts points.

At least clamping will generate revenue though. Whats the cost of administration though. phoning up everytime a visitor arrives in a car or a tradesman?

I can see major legal issues though, some houses do have private drives, you can't clamp there even if there is a debt owed. Visitors and tradesmen can be clamped unless there are notices to the effect that the estate is private and all unathorised cars will be clamped.

If a car is clamped mistakenly, then the MC is liable if any loss suffered. The potential for mistakes is huge

birdwatcher · 21-02-2013 3:49pm

Hi Folks
I think we're getting a little carried away about the clamping.
AFIK, the situation with the Spine Road is as follows;

Wicklow CC are in the process of taking over the spine road - it hasn't happened yet.
Wicklow CC have said that they have no plans to introduce parking controls on the spine road just yet. Obviously that excludes people parked on Double Yellow Lines or on the Zig-Zag lines at the Pedestrian crossing to the playground...if you park there - you'll get done!!
Anyone parking there is fair game for the parking warden/clamper.

The SUV that was clamped last weekend was targeted because it was parked on Double Yellow Lines on a corner. There is a signpost less than 4 feet away from the spot warning of clamping. If the driver chose to ignore the sign, that's this/her problem.

In terms of the idiots who persist in parking on the footpath down at Charlesland Wood - bear in mind that Wicklow CC are only taking charge of the road - NOT the grass area down the middle of the Spine Road, and NOT the footpaths on either side of the road.

Clamp everything - that's my motto!

d31b0y · 22-02-2013 10:44am

birdwatcher wrote: »

Clamp everything - that's my motto!

Wicklowandy · 25-02-2013 5:10pm

We'll see how many clamp fanbois we have in 12 months.....clamping in a residential estate a good distance from anything that encourages commuter parking, the best I've heard yet.

Amazing that so many pre boom built estates have managed so well without clamping (and management fees for that matter). Management companies and associated fees (and maybe even clamping) are a necessity with apartments, but with houses??

Roads should always be taken in charge, green spaces maintained by residents. The control of traffic and parking is a job for AGS or council traffic wardens not a private company with such a remarkably poor reputation. It has worked for years, all over the country.

Now after been sold a pup with many of the estates constructed during the boom, people accept methods to extract even more money from them. Anyone who believes that this is a good thing hasn't examined other estates (not estates in suburban or commuter link points) who have introduced such a thing:)

matt-dublin · 25-02-2013 8:21pm

Wicklowandy wrote: »

We'll see how many clamp fanbois we have in 12 months.....clamping in a residential estate a good distance from anything that encourages commuter parking, the best I've heard yet.

Amazing that so many pre boom built estates have managed so well without clamping (and management fees for that matter). Management companies and associated fees (and maybe even clamping) are a necessity with apartments, but with houses??

Roads should always be taken in charge, green spaces maintained by residents. The control of traffic and parking is a job for AGS or council traffic wardens not a private company with such a remarkably poor reputation. It has worked for years, all over the country.

Now after been sold a pup with many of the estates constructed during the boom, people accept methods to extract even more money from them. Anyone who believes that this is a good thing hasn't examined other estates (not estates in suburban or commuter link points) who have introduced such a thing:)

The difference between pre boom and boom estates is the planning authority forced the developers to set up management companies because the local authorities wouldn't take on the maintenance of communal areas.

26-02-2013 12:34am

matt-dublin wrote: »

The difference between pre boom and boom estates is the planning authority forced the developers to set up management companies because the local authorities wouldn't take on the maintenance of communal areas.

Forcing people that are invited to your home to register visits or risk being clamped is a horrible way to live.

Clamping cars because maintenance fees have not been paid (by landlords in some cases) is unacceptable IMHO. I think it will cause a lot of friction for many, make Charlesland less appealing and devalue homes further.

Annasopra · 26-02-2013 12:42am

2011 wrote: »

Forcing people that are invited to your home to register visits or risk being clamped is a horrible way to live.

Clamping cars because maintenance fees have not been paid (by landlords in some cases) is unacceptable IMHO. I think it will cause a lot of friction for many, make Charlesland less appealing and devalue homes further.

Sure but asking your neighbours to subsidise your fees is quite horrible too

Wicklowandy · 26-02-2013 1:14am

I read somewhere on this thread that somebody using the phone number to park daily and visit would be regarded as abusing the system.

Plenty of people have family that call regularly / daily.

I can understand clamping in residential areas which are close to shopping / trains / things that people look to park for free at. But why clamping in a residential area that doesn't have a problem with all day parkers? The knock on effect on values as stated by 2011 shouldn't be overlooked either, but residents association seem to have.

I think it smacks of using a steamroller to break a walnut. And the people that will lose are the residents.

The winners of course will be the fine folk of ncps, a bastion of fair and reasonable business practice;)

Wicklowandy · 26-02-2013 1:21am

What percentage of charlesland house are rented?

What percentage of apartments / duplexes?

Tenanted properties will have no input or consultation, and most landlords i doubt will participate in a residents organistion (unless they realise the potential knock on on property values)

What percentage of occupants have stated that this is the course of action they want?

Annasopra · 26-02-2013 1:36am

Wicklowandy wrote: »

What percentage of charlesland house are rented?

What percentage of apartments / duplexes?

Tenanted properties will have no input or consultation, and most landlords i doubt will participate in a residents organistion (unless they realise the potential knock on on property values)

What percentage of occupants have stated that this is the course of action they want?

I don't this is all of Charlesland that we are talking about

26-02-2013 7:49am

mango salsa wrote: »

Sure but asking your neighbours to subsidise your fees is quite horrible too

Agreed, but I do not think that this is the way to deal with this problem. For some people paying is not an option, they simply do not have the money.

What is the suggestion, clamp someone's car every day until they pay up?

Prevent them from getting to work by depriving them of their car?

This will make it harder for many to afford the expensive maintenance charges that exist in Charlesland.

matt-dublin · 26-02-2013 8:54am

If people can't pay their fees they can enter an agreement with the agents. This is for people who don't pay their fees and don't engage the agents and don't respond to calls. Basically people who don't believe they should have to pay. If the owner of the property who is in arrears is making an effort to pay they won't have an issue. We have two apartments here who owe in excess if 10k management fees, the courts were no use and the owner drives an expensive car, owns multiple successful business and properties. We will be clamping his tenants if he doesn't begin to pay. This will in turn affect his income, forcing him to have to pay his tenants back clamping fees and forcing him to have to pay us so he can rent his units out

For people who have family members who come in every day, that's fine, they can request an additional parking pass for that car.

This is for Charlesland crescent where you're right, we don't have a daytime parking issue but we do have a night parking issue with cars from the court and park using our spaces. We also don't have enough spaces for the amount of cars we have, so we need to ensure that crescent people get crescent spaces.

All of this has been thoroughly thought out and debated. We're not doing it because it sounds like fun, were doing it because it needs to be done

Jimjay · 26-02-2013 9:57am

matt-dublin wrote: »

If people can't pay their fees they can enter an agreement with the agents. This is for people who don't pay their fees and don't engage the agents and don't respond to calls. Basically people who don't believe they should have to pay. If the owner of the property who is in arrears is making an effort to pay they won't have an issue. We have two apartments here who owe in excess if 10k management fees, the courts were no use and the owner drives an expensive car, owns multiple successful business and properties. We will be clamping his tenants if he doesn't begin to pay. This will in turn affect his income, forcing him to have to pay his tenants back clamping fees and forcing him to have to pay us so he can rent his units out

For people who have family members who come in every day, that's fine, they can request an additional parking pass for that car.

This is for Charlesland crescent where you're right, we don't have a daytime parking issue but we do have a night parking issue with cars from the court and park using our spaces. We also don't have enough spaces for the amount of cars we have, so we need to ensure that crescent people get crescent spaces.

All of this has been thoroughly thought out and debated. We're not doing it because it sounds like fun, were doing it because it needs to be done

Thanks for the clarifaction matt, maybe that should have been posted earlier to avoid the confusion.

Why were the courts no use? Is it because there is no legal obligation to pay management fees? Or another reason?
Thanks

26-02-2013 10:11am

Matt, thanks for the clarification. It sounds to me that you have exhausted all other avenues and clamping for nonpayment of fees will only apply in exceptional circumstances.
Is that the case ?

I am very glad to hear that this will not be imposed on people that are making a genuine effort to pay.

Introduction of clamping in Charlesland Crescent and Wood

Comments