Clamped in my own parking space

Mikros · 16-08-2012 9:15pm

rat_race wrote: »

I was driving down the M50 the other day. It was raining. There was a car in the hard shoulder and the owner was standing there, holding a pink umbrella as he watched an AA employee put on his spare wheel.

I remember thinking to myself: "that guy needs to take a long hard look at himself".

I'm thinking something similar here!

Man up right? There is a post from a mod just up the page saying that boards.ie can't stand over advice to damage property. That is the real world. You don't know me or what I do for a living, but some of us have to stay within the law as it stands. I'm working with the management company to try and make sure a similar situation doesn't arise again. How about you write a letter to the Minister for Transport asking him to regulate private clamping? Might be a damn side more useful than laughing at pink umbrellas. No offence like.

fasttalkerchat · 16-08-2012 9:20pm

Mikros wrote: »

Man up right? There is a post from a mod just up the page saying that boards.ie can't stand over advice to damage property. That is the real world. You don't know me or what I do for a living, but some of us have to stay within the law as it stands. I'm working with the management company to try and make sure a similar situation doesn't arise again. How about you write a letter to the Minister for Transport asking him to regulate private clamping? Might be a damn side more useful than laughing at pink umbrellas. No offence like.

To be fair you could easily have found out how to get it off without damage. Several people here pointed out to you how to resolve the situation legally without funding the clampers. I'm sure you could have got someone here to do it for you for €50 if you didn't have the tools yourself.
I have no interest in regulating clamping as I believe it is a draconian measure and should be be unequivocally banned.

rat_race · 16-08-2012 9:29pm

Mikros wrote: »

Man up right? There is a post from a mod just up the page saying that boards.ie can't stand over advice to damage property. That is the real world. You don't know me or what I do for a living, but some of us have to stay within the law as it stands. I'm working with the management company to try and make sure a similar situation doesn't arise again. How about you write a letter to the Minister for Transport asking him to regulate private clamping? Might be a damn side more useful than laughing at pink umbrellas. No offence like.

I'm sorry, it just really bugs me when people get walked over and don't stand up for themselves. I know it is a tough situation, but you were totally in the right...you did absolutely nothing wrong. Forgetting the permit is not parking illegally. It's a nuisance to them, and one they should have dealt with swiftly, by removing the clamp.

And I hate the expression "only in Ireland", I really really do. But, on average, we don't have enough balls in this country...

I bought a set of lockpics and 2 books, and learned how to lockpick, after the last time I was clamped...realising I didnt have the patience to practise enough to be able to open any pin & tumbler lock, I decided I'd use a grinder time next I am unethically clamped. I'm talking about the real world here, too.

I've got two friends who have removed clamps (by damaging them), one guy did it twice -- he was in the right. The other guy was just obnoxious and didnt want to pay. Nothing ever happened to either of them.

Next time it happens to me, I will give one warning, inform them what I am going to do. Wait and then remove.

But if I'm a jackass who was clearly parked irresponsibly & illegally, I will pay the fine.

Mikros · 16-08-2012 9:46pm

rat_race wrote: »

I'm sorry, it just really bugs me when people get walked over and don't stand up for themselves. I know it is a tough situation, but you were totally in the right...you did absolutely nothing wrong. Forgetting the permit is not parking illegally. It's a nuisance to them, and one they should have dealt with swiftly, by removing the clamp.

And I hate the expression "only in Ireland", I really really do. But, on average, we don't have enough balls in this country...

There's nothing there I don't agree with and it's something I feel strongly about. But going legal made no sense - especially considering I would be suing myself (as I'm a member of the management company), not to mention the cost.

While everyone else seems to have angle grinders sitting in their boot I don't have any of the tools. Which means I have to buy or rent them. I also don't have the tools or knowledge to remove a wheel hub. I needed the car there and then leaving few options open. Maybe someone here could have helped me out, and that probably is my failing - being stupidly independent.

Look I'm not happy about it, but I took the only option I felt was open in the circumstances. I'm not lying down - I will keep following it through all the appeals and the management company have indicated they may refund me if I'm unsuccessful. The completley unreasonable actions of the clamping company have put me in this situation.

RATM · 16-08-2012 10:45pm

Your decision to pay them the €120 is your call at the end of the day. But if I was in your position I'd still be taking that legal case- the way to win it is all there in black and white in the link I posted- to repeat - there is no legal basis in Ireland for a person to enter into a contract with the use of a sign. The only way a contract can be entered into is verbally or by signature and that point is perfectly clear under Irish law but as yet no one has challenged the clampers on it, once they do then their days are numbered,

And if your solititor charges €200 an hour then I'd advise to find a different one- there are 4,000 unemployed solicitors in Ireland, many of whom would be glad to do it on a no win no fee (especially as the legislation all points towards a winning case). If you had him on a no win no fee then your financial risk is zero. The management company wouldn't be party to the action, only the champers who were the offenders in the first place.

Paulw · 16-08-2012 10:51pm

RATM wrote: »

But if I was in your position I'd still be taking that legal case- the way to win it is all there in black and white in the link I posted

The management company wouldn't be party to the action, only the champers who were the offenders in the first place.

So, why don't you put your money where your mouth is, and take a case? Easy to do. Find a development with clamping enforcement. Park there. Wait to get clamped, and then you can bring a case against them? But no, you'd prefer to hide behind a keyboard and advise others to do it. :rolleyes:

As for the management company, of course they are party to the action. They have to be. They are responsible for the parking. They have contracted the clampers to enforce parking. :eek:

In the end, the OP did what he thought was the most responsible course of action. I have sympathy for that. I was clamped incorrectly before in our development, but the management company quickly sorted the issue for me. Each circumstance is different though.

Mikros · 16-08-2012 11:48pm

RATM wrote: »

Your decision to pay them the €120 is your call at the end of the day.

The management company wouldn't be party to the action, only the champers who were the offenders in the first place.

A solicitor is not as quick to take on a "no win no fee" case on an area of untested law as you may think. Looking through other clamping cases in the UK it usually involved an appeal before the plaintiff was successful. I agree the linked article you showed (which was great btw) sets out a strong case.

However I am not a visitor - the case would likely rest on the conditions on the leasehold - there may be one in there that allows the MC introduce new regulations if agreed at the AGM. In that case my consent could be implied by membership of the MC. The point is barristers make a living debating back and forth these things, and in this case I would be the one paying by the hour.

And as Paulw has said the management company would almost definitely be involved. The clamping company is acting under their direction and could be considered their agents. I would not be surprised to find an indemnity clause in the contract between the MC and the clamping company. It would be a pyrrhic victory to be awarded damages and costs only to realise there is no money to collect the bins as a result.

Also a success for me would likely be the end of clamping in the development. The permit system has been successful in getting people to pay their fees and regulate parking, both of which we have had a lot of difficulty with. A common sense approach to these things would prevent all this hassle - "oh you have a valid permit - let me take that clamp off there, sorry". Sadly this seems to be lacking in my situation.

The realities of actually pursuing a case have been very sobering for me. Our legal system is slow, expensive and difficult to access. Life is too short sometimes.

Motorist · 17-08-2012 12:40am

Mikros wrote: »

Look I'm not happy about it, but I took the only option I felt was open in the circumstances. I'm not lying down - I will keep following it through all the appeals and the management company have indicated they may refund me if I'm unsuccessful. The completley unreasonable actions of the clamping company have put me in this situation.

As I said before, all those appeals will be a COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME.

Go through with them if you like, but just so you know what to expect from that bunch of APCOA scumbags.

Victor · 17-08-2012 3:34am

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

I have no interest in regulating clamping as I believe it is a draconian measure and should be be unequivocally banned.

Realise that the alternatives that property owners will have to come up with may be even more draconian.

Victor · 17-08-2012 3:38am

Motorist wrote: »

scumbags.

Can everyone lay off the throwing of insults and badgering of users?

djimi · 17-08-2012 9:30am

Mikros wrote: »

Look I'm not happy about it, but I took the only option I felt was open in the circumstances. I'm not lying down - I will keep following it through all the appeals and the management company have indicated they may refund me if I'm unsuccessful. The completley unreasonable actions of the clamping company have put me in this situation.

If I were you I would continue to apply as much pressure as you can to the management company in an effort to get your money back. They are the ones who hire the clampers and they are the ones who have the power to get the issue sorted for you. Ask them to write to the clamping company threatening to pull the contract if the money is not returned; unless they are complete morons they are not going to risk losing a couple of grand in an effort to hold onto €120.

oppenheimer1 · 18-08-2012 12:12am

Mikros wrote: »

A solicitor is not as quick to take on a "no win no fee" case on an area of untested law as you may think. Looking through other clamping cases in the UK it usually involved an appeal before the plaintiff was successful. I agree the linked article you showed (which was great btw) sets out a strong case.

However I am not a visitor - the case would likely rest on the conditions on the leasehold - there may be one in there that allows the MC introduce new regulations if agreed at the AGM. In that case my consent could be implied by membership of the MC. The point is barristers make a living debating back and forth these things, and in this case I would be the one paying by the hour.

And as Paulw has said the management company would almost definitely be involved. The clamping company is acting under their direction and could be considered their agents. I would not be surprised to find an indemnity clause in the contract between the MC and the clamping company. It would be a pyrrhic victory to be awarded damages and costs only to realise there is no money to collect the bins as a result.

Also a success for me would likely be the end of clamping in the development. The permit system has been successful in getting people to pay their fees and regulate parking, both of which we have had a lot of difficulty with. A common sense approach to these things would prevent all this hassle - "oh you have a valid permit - let me take that clamp off there, sorry". Sadly this seems to be lacking in my situation.

The realities of actually pursuing a case have been very sobering for me. Our legal system is slow, expensive and difficult to access. Life is too short sometimes.

How can you say that when you didn't try the legal system route?

Pawwed Rig · 18-08-2012 10:39am

Victor wrote: »

Realsie that the alternatives that property owners will have to come up with may be even more draconian.

Is there any reason why the management company cannot apply their own clamps? I know where I work the company has no problem personally clamping cars.
Then in the even of unfairness as with the OP the Mgt company could remove the clamp.
Also it would mean only people genuinely causing a nuisance would actually be clamped.

Mikros · 18-08-2012 11:17am

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

How can you say that when you didn't try the legal system route?

Again -

Expensive: the upfront cost of a solicitor would be in excess of the €120 release fee. If the case was to run on it could be many multiples of €120 with no guarantee of recovering your costs.

Slow: a case could take months to be heard in court, and only after plenty of trading of letters etc.

Difficult to access: there is no "small claims court" for civil torts. For a lay person the only realistic option is to go through a solicitor.

Yeah, I stand by what I said. Do you know some way to take a case that it is cheap, quick and easy? Please do share.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Is there any reason why the management company cannot apply their own clamps? I know where I work the company has no problem personally clamping cars.
Then in the even of unfairness as with the OP the Mgt company could remove the clamp.
Also it would mean only people genuinely causing a nuisance would actually be clamped.

It's mainly a cost thing I'd say - the outside clamping companies are not paid a fee by the management company, they make their money on the release fees. For the management company to do it they would need to buy the clamps and employ someone to put them on and potentially be available 24 hours a day to take them off.

Pawwed Rig · 18-08-2012 11:33am

Mikros wrote: »

It's mainly a cost thing I'd say - the outside clamping companies are not paid a fee by the management company, they make their money on the release fees. For the management company to do it they would need to buy the clamps and employ someone to put them on and potentially be available 24 hours a day to take them off.

Not sure how it could be a cost thing. By the sound of your complex there are many members of the management company lining there. If there was an issue surely someone could contact any member of the company and the situation could be assessed from a non revenue raising perspective ie if there is an actual nuisance. No need to hire someone and no reason for innocent people to be clamped. The mgt company could contact residents if their car needs to be moved rather than having them clamped.
I am sure a clamp is not that expensive.
I think it is immoral of the mgt company to hire these guys to come in and extort money from residents and visitors.
Alternatively you could put into the contract of the clampers that they MUST realease a clamp on the orders of the mgt company. Who is hiring who here?

Mikros · 18-08-2012 11:59am

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Not sure how it could be a cost thing. By the ....
Alternatively you could put into the contract of the clampers that they MUST realease a clamp on the orders of the mgt company. Who is hiring who here?

Current cost to management company of contracting external clampers: €0
Cost of management company doing their own clamping: Some non zero amount

It might be different in other developments, but in ours the principle is keep the fees as low as possible.

Also as this is a first here, the MC have asked me to go through all the appeal hoops to see how it works. If the appeal is rejected they will consider directly refunding me and will take it up with the clamping company. Maybe some changes in the contract when it is renewed might be needed. It could be a change in the permit system - maybe a register of resident vehicles that the clamping company have instead of stickers. Will be working on it anyway.

Pawwed Rig · 18-08-2012 12:27pm

Mikros wrote: »

Current cost to management company of contracting external clampers: €0
Cost of management company doing their own clamping: Some non zero amount

You forgot the cost to poor unfortunate whose parking permit accidently falls off window - €300+ *
It is n ot just about the management company. The MC should be looking after the interests of the tenants too.

Also I would have reservations about a MC that invite companies with the reputation that these companies have onto the premisis and enable them to snoop about un supervised.

*I presume you didn't pay the €300+ that you mentioned earlier in the thread btw?

TheTurk1972 · 18-08-2012 1:26pm

I was clamped again yesterday.
Same situation as the OP. I drive different cars all the time when working, so cant really change the parking permit reg at 2am.
I get clamped because the reg doesnt match.
I just cut the chain with a nice big bolt cutter and throw it to the side of the road. I have a note attached to the parking permit telling them that anything attached to my car now belongs to me and I can do whatever I like with it. Its as legal as their clamping notices are.

They seem to have no problem identifying me when they want to call threatening me with all sorts of legal action, but it all comes to nothing. Funny though that they clamp me because they cant identify the car from the permit, yet they still manage to get my phone number using the permit.

Victor · 18-08-2012 2:15pm

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Is there any reason why the management company cannot apply their own clamps? I know where I work the company has no problem personally clamping cars.

Residents don't have training in when to / not clamp and more importantly don't know how to deal with people that have been clamped.

Based on the 'traffic cone in front of my house' brigade, those people would clamp people for parking in 'their' (not) parking spaces.

cookie1977 · 18-08-2012 2:46pm

Victor wrote: »

Based on the 'traffic cone in front of my house' brigade, those people would clamp people for parking in 'their' (not) parking spaces.

How I hate that! I pay my taxes like everyone else so the "road" is as much mine as it iss yours. Grrrr

P. Breathnach · 18-08-2012 2:56pm

There is something about clamping that trips a number of people into keyboard warrior mode. For some reason, people do not get as exercised about obstructive parking or occupying somebody else's assigned place. I am in a minority, because those practices vex me more than does clamping.

I have some sympathy with OP: it's a classic situation where discretion is the greater part of valour. But there is one little thing that I think worth asking: why did the permit fall off the windscreen? Was it a case where it did not have the right adhesive properties? If so, I would be having words with the management company.

TheChizler · 18-08-2012 3:06pm

cookie1977 wrote: »

Victor wrote: »

Based on the 'traffic cone in front of my house' brigade, those people would clamp people for parking in 'their' (not) parking spaces.

How I hate that! I pay my taxes like everyone else so the "road" is as much mine as it iss yours. Grrrr

Well the law does state that you can't block access to someone's property without their permission.

Pawwed Rig · 18-08-2012 3:21pm

Victor wrote: »

Residents don't have training in when to / not clamp and more importantly don't know how to deal with people that have been clamped.

Based on the 'traffic cone in front of my house' brigade, those people would clamp people for parking in 'their' (not) parking spaces.

I am sure someone in the MC could do the 1 hour training course that the private clampers do? Seriously put a clamp on, Take a couple of photos, leave a sticker on the window. When person turns up check their story, if they are genuine take the clamp off, if they are not genuine then give them a lecture about responsible parking and let them off. Therefore no extortion, person might get message after wasting, say an hour, of his time and everyone goes away happy.

At one stage in this thread the OP was saying his charges were being increased on a daily rate. Statrted at 125 and was up at 300+ at one stage. The MC is to blame for inviting these guys onto the premisis. As he is part of the MC then he is to blame or if he voted against it then claim off the mgt company

jd · 18-08-2012 3:33pm

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I am sure someone in the MC could do the 1 hour training course that the private clampers do?

And have this one owner on call 24x7? The nature of OMCs is that they contract out most of the things they have to do.

Dionysius2 · 18-08-2012 3:39pm

Does anybody know iif the clampering companies keep a list of persistent parking space offenders in private parking complexes ?

Pawwed Rig · 18-08-2012 3:41pm

jd wrote: »

And have this one owner on call 24x7? The nature of OMCs is that they contract out most of the things they have to do.

Which is not the point really.
The point is that the OP and the rest of the MC invited a group of unregulated persons onto their premisis to enable them the extort money from the residents and their visitors. If they want a deterant then it is easy to do as I pointed out. Anyone can put on a clamp and take it off if that is what the MC REALLY want to do. If they can't be bothered doing it themselves then the natural result is residents getting huge fines and their personal (property) vehicles disabled.
It would be simple for the MC to lay down ground rules for the clampers which they seemingly didn't bother to do in this case instead allowing them free reign.

Dionysius2 wrote: »

Does anybody know iif the clampering companies keep a list of persistent parking space offenders in private parking complexes ?

They know where they are most likely to make money if that is your question.

Mikros · 18-08-2012 4:34pm

No I only paid the initial €120. I'm sure the 24 hour increasing charge is just an "encouragement" to get people to pay. I don't agree with an increasing fee at all because I'm sure some people would be very distressed over having to come up with the money under pressure like that.

The sticker is wrecked because I have been swapping it a lot between a few different cars. I was in in rush at the time and just sort of slapped it in the general direction of the window. If I paid any attention at the time it would have stayed, i'm not disputing the sticker issue.

It is not practical to have the MC do the clamping and expect resident(s) to be on call 24/7 for free. Employing someone to be on call would be a significant cost also. Then you have to think about accepting payment - cash only is useless for someone stuck without their car to get to an ATM. I could fill a page with reasons...

Pawwed Rig · 18-08-2012 4:53pm

Yes it is a common tactic from clampers to keep upping the bill so that victims will be scared and pay quickly in case the bill gets way too high. Otherwise known as intimidation. Glad to hear you did not allow them to intimidate you into paying. It is worth noting that Dublin City council clampers do not do this.

ex·tor·tion

Law . the crime of obtaining money or some other thing of value by the abuse of one's office or authority.

oppressive or illegal exaction, as of excessive price or interest: the extortions of usurers.

The fact that the MC is encouraging this practise and actively requested the company to do it would seem to me to be the main issue here. The blame lies souly with the MC and therefore yourself as a member of the MC.

I will remind you that in your first post mentioned extortion before you revealed you were actually a member of the MC. I really don't see the issue here? You hired the clampers, they clamped as per their agreement with MC (ie you) you paid they removed clamp. Not trying to be smart and say it is your own fault but if you guys hired them??

cookie1977 · 18-08-2012 4:53pm

TheChizler wrote: »

Well the law does state that you can't block access to someone's property without their permission.

Ah I'm not talking about blocking a drive way. I've had that happen to me outside my house and I've had to leave notes because I can't drive in to my driveway. That's of course wrong. . I'm talking about people putting cones outside their walls (sometimes they don't have driveways) and thinking that they can do that because it's their house.

fasttalkerchat · 18-08-2012 5:53pm

cookie1977 wrote: »

Ah I'm not talking about blocking a drive way. I've had that happen to me outside my house and I've had to leave notes because I can't drive in to my driveway. That's of course wrong. . I'm talking about people putting cones outside their walls (sometimes they don't have driveways) and thinking that they can do that because it's their house.

I do this. I know it has no legal standing but hopefully someone will drive on rather than move the cone to park there. Where I live is really close to town so people will park there up to 6pm but at night the street is empty apart from residents.

If I'm coming home during the day for a shower and something to eat I might have a 10 minute walk to the next legal parking space.

Mikros · 18-08-2012 6:26pm

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I will remind you that in your first post mentioned extortion before you revealed you were actually a member of the MC. I really don't see the issue here? You hired the clampers, they clamped as per their agreement with MC (ie you) you paid they removed clamp. Not trying to be smart and say it is your own fault but if you guys hired them??

Yes I'm a member of the MC - that means I have one vote out of 200+ at an AGM held once a year. I am not involved in drawing up contracts. My issue was that a bit of common sense couldn't apply and once I showed I had a valid permit the clamp could not be removed. That and the "not our problem" attitude from clamping company, the €120 per 24 hour charge, the feeling that I was getting screwed over a mix up with a permit in my "own" parking space and in a development I'm paying €1600 a year fees in.

So as I've said before I'm now working with the MC to see what, if anything, can be done to stop it happening again.

I've tried to explain all the issues at play. Its a subject I think needs debate at a lot of levels. But I think my own particular incident in this thread has run it's course.

cookie1977 · 18-08-2012 6:27pm

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

I do this. I know it has no legal standing but hopefully someone will drive on rather than move the cone to park there. Where I live is really close to town so people will park there up to 6pm but at night the street is empty apart from residents.

If I'm coming home during the day for a shower and something to eat I might have a 10 minute walk to the next legal parking space.

I would imagine most people drive on. I've moved a few in my time.

fasttalkerchat · 18-08-2012 6:30pm

cookie1977 wrote: »

I would imagine most people drive on. I've moved a few in my time.

Thankfully it has never been moved although a few times I have had to park at an angle because someone was half in the space. Council were worse than useless so that's the best we can do.

Pawwed Rig · 18-08-2012 7:48pm

Mikros wrote: »

So as I've said before I'm now working with the MC to see what, if anything, can be done to stop it happening again.

I've tried to explain all the issues at play. Its a subject I think needs debate at a lot of levels. But I think my own particular incident in this thread has run it's course.

Fair enough. Hope you get some joy out of it from MC.
Hopefully they will think twice before allowing this kind of element access to the premises in future

Dionysius2 · 18-08-2012 8:07pm

Mikros wrote: »

Yes I'm a member of the MC - that means I have one vote out of 200+ at an AGM held once a year. I am not involved in drawing up contracts. My issue was that a bit of common sense couldn't apply and once I showed I had a valid permit the clamp could not be removed. That and the "not our problem" attitude from clamping company, the €120 per 24 hour charge, the feeling that I was getting screwed over a mix up with a permit in my "own" parking space and in a development I'm paying €1600 a year fees in.

Without a doubt you have been hard done by when the bare facts as you outline them are evaluated. There is something fundamentally wrong with such a system and that imo can only be put right at source, ie by doing battle with the people who hired the clampers. But unless you are prepared to go out on a limb and make a complete cause celebre of your case with a significant knockon sanction for the management company then nothing will change. And what might that be ? If there are a goodly number of residents who are disenchanted with the clamping regime, could you organise a withholding of the annual mgt fee pending a more agreeable clamping arrangement ?

fasttalkerchat · 18-08-2012 8:26pm

Sorry OP, just one more question... do you actually own the space of just rent it?

cookie1977 · 18-08-2012 8:29pm

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

Sorry OP, just one more question... do you actually own the space of just rent it?

Based on the posts he doesn't own it outright but as an apartment owner has rights of use of the space.

fasttalkerchat · 18-08-2012 9:21pm

cookie1977 wrote: »

Based on the posts he doesn't own it outright but as an apartment owner has rights of use of the space.

That's what I assumed. If somehow the space was sold along with the apartment it would be interesting to see if there was a contractual stipulation allowing the management company to regulate use of/access to the parking space.

cookie1977 · 18-08-2012 9:26pm

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

That's what I assumed. If somehow the space was sold along with the apartment it would be interesting to see if there was a contractual stipulation allowing the management company to regulate use of/access to the parking space.

That's an interesting point. I'm a director of an apartment complex and we were looking at whether or not we could use a clamping company to enforce payments of annual fees (we're a long way off from making a decision). I dont think we could as all our parking spaces are actually completely owned by the apt owners unlike the OPs situation. If the person did own the space (like the apartment) then before the sale could go through any debts would have to be paid from the sale.

Paulw · 19-08-2012 10:57am

Dionysius2 wrote: »

If there are a goodly number of residents who are disenchanted with the clamping regime, could you organise a withholding of the annual mgt fee pending a more agreeable clamping arrangement ?

You will generally find that the vast majority of members of the management company are in favour of clamping. This is most commonly how clamping is brought in.

We brought in clamping for two reasons - 1) non-residents and non-visitors taking our parking spaces, and 2) to ensure payment of management fees.

Out of 112 units, I believe there were 3 complaints and objections to clamping.

Withholding payment of management fees is the worst thing you can do. If your fees are not paid, then you have no vote at an AGM, hence can't help change things. Also, then the management company has the ability to remove further services, even up to, and including, insurance. Also, non-payment of fees effects your neighbours, who then have to make up the amount you haven't paid, until your fees are fully paid. Hitting your neighbours if never a good idea, since if their fees are paid, they have a vote at an AGM.

Dionysius2 · 19-08-2012 1:35pm

Paulw wrote: »

You will generally find that the vast majority of members of the management company are in favour of clamping. This is most commonly how clamping is brought in.

We brought in clamping for two reasons - 1) non-residents and non-visitors taking our parking spaces, and 2) to ensure payment of management fees.

Out of 112 units, I believe there were 3 complaints and objections to clamping.

Withholding payment of management fees is the worst thing you can do. If your fees are not paid, then you have no vote at an AGM, hence can't help change things. Also, then the management company has the ability to remove further services, even up to, and including, insurance. Also, non-payment of fees effects your neighbours, who then have to make up the amount you haven't paid, until your fees are fully paid. Hitting your neighbours if never a good idea, since if their fees are paid, they have a vote at an AGM.

That explanation is quite helpful to the overall situation regarding private property clamping. Good points, well made. Tks

Mikros · 19-08-2012 3:39pm

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

Sorry OP, just one more question... do you actually own the space of just rent it?

I would have to look at the deeds on the leasehold to see the exact wording. I think the ownership rests with the management company but I get a exclusive licence to use it or some such wording.

My intention is not to get rid of clamping in the development. I wish we didn't need it, but with a train station just down the road the place would be overrun with people looking for free parking otherwise. It also gets people to pay up their management fees - which was a big problem in the past. We were in danger of getting into the nasty loop of people withholding fees because the service wasn't up to scratch, which meant the service deteriorated because there was no money, which caused more people to withhold fees, etc. etc.

What I want is a system that has a little bit of common sense. One of the options open is to pay a clamping company a flat fee and the "fines" go back to the MC. That way the MC would have complete control over the clamping as the clamping company is not making their money from release fees. The problem is again a cost one - will the fines cover the cost of the fixed contract?

the_syco · 19-08-2012 6:48pm

cookie1977 wrote: »

I dont think we could as all our parking spaces are actually completely owned by the apt owners unlike the OPs situation.

Do they own the apartments, or do they have a 1000 year (or something long like it) lease on them? I ask, as if it's the latter I wonder how you can own the parking space but not the apartment?

TheTurk1972 · 19-08-2012 6:52pm

Mikros wrote: »

I would have to look at the deeds on the leasehold to see the exact wording. I think the ownership rests with the management company but I get a exclusive licence to use it or some such wording.

My intention is not to get rid of clamping in the development. I wish we didn't need it, but with a train station just down the road the place would be overrun with people looking for free parking otherwise. It also gets people to pay up their management fees - which was a big problem in the past. We were in danger of getting into the nasty loop of people withholding fees because the service wasn't up to scratch, which meant the service deteriorated because there was no money, which caused more people to withhold fees, etc. etc.

What I want is a system that has a little bit of common sense. One of the options open is to pay a clamping company a flat fee and the "fines" go back to the MC. That way the MC would have complete control over the clamping as the clamping company is not making their money from release fees. The problem is again a cost one - will the fines cover the cost of the fixed contract?

To me that means nobody else can park or put anything in that parking space - including a clamp - without your permission.

Mikros · 19-08-2012 7:22pm

TheTurk1972 wrote: »

To me that means nobody else can park or put anything in that parking space - including a clamp - without your permission.

A view I would have a lot of time for. However the argument was put to me that because it was voted in at the AGM and I am a member of the management company I have in fact given permission. There may also be some general clause in the leasehold that allows the MC to regulate common areas or some such catch all. So it may not be as simple unfortunately.

cookie1977 · 19-08-2012 7:43pm

the_syco wrote: »

Do they own the apartments, or do they have a 1000 year (or something long like it) lease on them? I ask, as if it's the latter I wonder how you can own the parking space but not the apartment?

People bought their apt and also had the option to buy a car park space (36,000 at the time). Some people from businesses located near the complex also bought the car park spaces and these do not also own apt. Some apt owners did not buy any spaces.

Re some of the other comments. I doubt very much that people could be excluded from votes at agm's (not that there's ever a lot to vote on) just because they haven't payed their management fees unless you've got that in the details of your agreement. Not sure about other apt complexes but we never get many turning up to our AGM's, in fact most times only 2 or 3 people excl our 6 directors turn up. Although we still thankfully have almost 95% compliance with maintenance fees payment. To encourage payment we send the usual barrage of letters until people go over 1000euro in debt then we go legal (issuing legal letters). To date we've only taken one court case (and gotten a judgement we cant serve for reasons I wont go in to) as most people agree to pay lump sums if we waive the interest and legal costs, which we do if they pay within 2 weeks.

I dont think I'd be in favour of bringing in clamping in our complex.

Paulw · 19-08-2012 9:18pm

cookie1977 wrote: »

I doubt very much that people could be excluded from votes at agm's (not that there's ever a lot to vote on) just because they haven't payed their management fees unless you've got that in the details of your agreement.

Not sure about other apt complexes but we never get many turning up to our AGM's, in fact most times only 2 or 3 people excl our 6 directors turn up. Although we still thankfully have almost 95% compliance with maintenance fees payment.

Most articles of association of management companies, and also the Lease Contracts state that you need to have your fees paid up before you can vote at an AGM. It's a normal clause in the vast majority of developments.

We have used it to exclude some members from voting, since they had outstanding fees due.

Also, most AGM require a quorum of members to attend. That number will depend on the size of the development. Ours, with 112 units has a quorum of 7. So, without 7 members attending then it's not an official AGM, and the meeting has to be postponed until a quorum is met. Thankfully that has never happened.

Sounds like you need to read your paperwork again, and check such clauses.

cookie1977 · 19-08-2012 9:21pm

Paulw wrote: »

Most articles of association of management companies, and also the Lease Contracts state that you need to have your fees paid up before you can vote at an AGM. It's a normal clause in the vast majority of developments.

We have used it to exclude some members from voting, since they had outstanding fees due.

Also, most AGM require a quorum of members to attend. That number will depend on the size of the development. Ours, with 112 units has a quorum of 7. So, without 7 members attending then it's not an official AGM, and the meeting has to be postponed until a quorum is met. Thankfully that has never happened.

Sounds like you need to read your paperwork again, and check such clauses.

We would still have very few votes to put to the owners. What would you be voting on all the time. Our quorum would be met since the directors are owners. Plus a couple of owners who would attend. Our complex also only has 50 apts and a business.

Paulw · 20-08-2012 9:11am

cookie1977 wrote: »

What would you be voting on all the time. Our quorum would be met since the directors are owners.

Ah ok so.

Voting on - the budget needs to be voted on every year. How the money is spent, how much fees we need to pay, etc. Other than that, issues like clamping, how best to deal with anti-social issue, how to deal with pet control issues, etc. There's always something to vote on. That's what an AGM is for.

cookie1977 · 20-08-2012 9:15am

Paulw wrote: »

Ah ok so.

Voting on - the budget needs to be voted on every year. How the money is spent, how much fees we need to pay, etc. Other than that, issues like clamping, how best to deal with anti-social issue, how to deal with pet control issues, etc. There's always something to vote on. That's what an AGM is for.

Yes but that's just day to day (year to year) stuff. Do you really think the non payers care about that sort of thing? I don't.

Clamped in my own parking space

Comments