Login | Register
SearchMy Stuff
My ProfileMy PreferencesMy Mates RSS Feed
1 2
4 5
Reply to Topic
Author Discussion

surveyor

7,664 posts

70 months

[news] 
Saturday 6th October 2012 quote quote all
Pleased to say gents, for the many who wanted to get rid of the clampers, most of your solutions are now illegal.

Get used to these posts, as there is no proper consideration for a landowner enforcing their parking rights there will be more.

13th

Original Poster:

3,165 posts

99 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
Thanks all.

I LOVE the idea of getting his home address from the DVLA, is it really that easy??

I'd be delighted to contact his employers but all we know is that he travels into town from the station.

The man is a bully, very agressive but sadly there are only women to deal with him and he has no hesitation in using his considerable bulk to invade personal space.

Still now having been stood up to hopefully he will just disappear.

FiF

23,879 posts

137 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
surveyor said:
Pleased to say gents, for the many who wanted to get rid of the clampers, most of your solutions are now illegal.

Get used to these posts, as there is no proper consideration for a landowner enforcing their parking rights there will be more.
This is pretty much my view.

For somebody who wants to enforce their rights on land that is not required for regular public access, let's say an employee car park for example, then the only viable solution these days is to install some sort of gated / barrier system, and give everybody a key, pass code.

Even then that's not a 100% solution, as has been seen on this very forum, with a shared car park where one of the authorised users abused the privilege of the pass key and doled them out to any old Tom, Dick or, indeed, Harriette.

For somebody, like the OP, who wishes to allow regular and easy entry and exit for customers and therefore a barrier system would possibly be prohibitively expensive and/or impractical, then indeed there will be a lot more threads like this. No doubt accompanied by posts from that famous law firm Tap Room and Snug Chambers with barking comments about claiming for civil damages because someone has tucked a "Please don't park here again." note under a windscreen wiper.


Edited by FiF on Sunday 7th October 09:39

blueg33

13,645 posts

110 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
k99 said:
Sir Bagalot said:
Block him in but leave a contact number visible on the dashboard of the car blocking them in.

He comes back, calls number and person answers saying yeah ok, give me a min and I'll move it. Go back 15 mins later and move it. He'll soon get the message.
+1
So then a nasty agressive bloke has a contact number that he can use at 2am, 3am 4am etc. Not a good plan IMO

Zeeky

2,519 posts

98 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
surveyor said:
...there is no proper consideration for a landowner enforcing their parking rights there will be more.
The landowner can ask for consideration in return for the parking and claim it off the RK. The consideration can be set at a level that would put most people off. For those who agree to pay, the inconvenience is offset by the payment.

Advertisement

9mm

2,047 posts

96 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
FiF said:
This is pretty much my view.

For somebody who wants to enforce their rights on land that is not required for regular public access, let's say an employee car park for example, then the only viable solution these days is to install some sort of gated / barrier system, and give everybody a key, pass code.

Even then that's not a 100% solution, as has been seen on this very forum, with a shared car park where one of the authorised users abused the privilege of the pass key and doled them out to any old Tom, Dick or, indeed, Harriette.

For somebody, like the OP, who wishes to allow regular and easy entry and exit for customers and therefore a barrier system would possibly be prohibitively expensive and/or impractical, then indeed there will be a lot more threads like this. No doubt accompanied by posts from that famous law firm Tap Room and Snug Chambers with barking comments about claiming for civil damages because someone has tucked a "Please don't park here again." note under a windscreen wiper.


Edited by FiF on Sunday 7th October 09:39
If it's not worth installing barriers, stickering offending vehicles, confronting nasty big men or getting scary letters from law firms, then it's not worth getting excited about at all is it?

The advice given has been sensible. Sticker up the car in a way which will seriously inconvenience this guy. If he is as intimidating when speaking to staff as has been stated then speak to the Police.

surveyor

7,664 posts

70 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
Zeeky said:
surveyor said:
...there is no proper consideration for a landowner enforcing their parking rights there will be more.
The landowner can ask for consideration in return for the parking and claim it off the RK. The consideration can be set at a level that would put most people off. For those who agree to pay, the inconvenience is offset by the payment.
But that's bks dreamed up by some civil servants in Whitehall. Most of these people don't charge for parking so there is no loss, and no consideration. Equally say a customers car park, how can you define the loss of a customer driving on in financial terms? Or the loss of an employee having to spend time looking for another parking space.

No point in pretending that this law has given landowners rights in defending their land - all it's taken-away was enforcement that worked. What they should have done is brought in regulated fee's for clampers, and a proper compulsory and binding third party tribunal.


13th

Original Poster:

3,165 posts

99 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
9mm said:
The advice given has been sensible. Sticker up the car in a way which will seriously inconvenience this guy. If he is as intimidating when speaking to staff as has been stated then speak to the Police.
Yes that's really the way to go; although I'm also going to try to get his home adress and send him a strongly worded letter, once I get my Directorships and become more powerfully built winkbiggrin

liner33

4,205 posts

88 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
blueg33 said:
So then a nasty agressive bloke has a contact number that he can use at 2am, 3am 4am etc. Not a good plan IMO
Use a payg mobile and you can return the compliment as you will now have his number

13th

Original Poster:

3,165 posts

99 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
liner33 said:
Use a payg mobile and you can return the compliment as you will now have his number
I really don't want to wind the guy up I just don't want him in our car park or in my face.

I think stickers will cause him to kick off but will give that a go; although I wonder if a letter to his home address detailing our parking charges might just be the ticket, so to speak wink

Zeeky

2,519 posts

98 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
surveyor said:
Zeeky said:
surveyor said:
...there is no proper consideration for a landowner enforcing their parking rights there will be more.
The landowner can ask for consideration in return for the parking and claim it off the RK. The consideration can be set at a level that would put most people off. For those who agree to pay, the inconvenience is offset by the payment.
But that's bks dreamed up by some civil servants in Whitehall. Most of these people don't charge for parking so there is no loss, and no consideration. Equally say a customers car park, how can you define the loss of a customer driving on in financial terms? Or the loss of an employee having to spend time looking for another parking space.

No point in pretending that this law has given landowners rights in defending their land - all it's taken-away was enforcement that worked. What they should have done is brought in regulated fee's for clampers, and a proper compulsory and binding third party tribunal.
You are thinking in terms of claiming for damages. There is nothing to stop a landowner charging a large sum of money to park on his land. Most people will be put off by the price. Those who wish to pay will provide compensation to the landowner for the service provided in the form of the charge for parking.

You need to distinguish between a claim for the price of a service provided and a claim for damages for trespass or breach of contract. The price cannot be regulated by the Office of Fair Trading or the Courts. It does not have to be reasonable. It just has to be agreed. An effective business model is there to be used and as the RK can now be chased for the debt there is less chance people will avoid payment.


In any event if you believe you cannot claim damages unless you offer paid-for parking how do you think you can claim a release fee if a vehicle is clamped? They are both claims for damages.

9mm

2,047 posts

96 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
You are stuck with doing something and expecting possible repercussions or letting it continue. It's pretty unlikely anyone has missed a novel, painless solution. I suppose you could warn him you are going to sticker his car but he appears to be already aware you find his behaviour unacceptable. The only other thing I can think of is some CCTV in the space where he tends to kick off with staff.

mjb1

1,141 posts

45 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
If the stickering doesn't work, get his address from DVLA, and send him a letter informing him of the car parking charges that he will begin to incur. I presume there is a public/railway pay and display car park nearby? Use that as a starting point for your charges (add on 25%, or more if you like) and then invoice him for his use. It may be worth getting some cctv setup, both to prove that he has been using your car park, and in case he does get aggressive.

Pontoneer

3,464 posts

72 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
The other notion is , presuming he arrives and parks earlier than your company opens for business , is to install gates and lock them when your business closes at night . If he can't get in at the time he needs to get the train to work he will surely look elsewhere .

Pontoneer

3,464 posts

72 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
Zeeky said:
54 Offence of immobilising etc. vehicles

(1)A person commits an offence who, without lawful authority—

(a)immobilises a motor vehicle by the attachment to the vehicle, or a part of it, of an immobilising device, or

(b)moves, or restricts the movement of, such a vehicle by any means,

intending to prevent or inhibit the removal of the vehicle by a person otherwise entitled to remove it.
Another thought is that you could put a sign up stating the daily fee for parking in your car park , say 10% more than the railway car park ( free to customers ) , stating that the fee is payable before leaving .

Then block his car in and only move when he has paid the fee . Until he pays he is not entitled to move it .

13th

Original Poster:

3,165 posts

99 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
Pontoneer said:
Another thought is that you could put a sign up stating the daily fee for parking in your car park , say 10% more than the railway car park ( free to customers ) , stating that the fee is payable before leaving .

Then block his car in and only move when he has paid the fee . Until he pays he is not entitled to move it .
That's difficult as we have a chemist on our site so he could just pop in for a pack of plasters........... it would still be a lot cheaper than the pay and display next to us.

Thanks so much for all the suggestions, I'm going to go with the stickers, the DVLA and should push come to shove due to the nature of our work we're on fast alert (or whatever it's called) to the police station 200 yards from us.

Interesting to know that should we errect a tariff we can prevent him moving until he has paid!! another route forward as although this guy is the most prolific he's by no means the only one.

mjb1

1,141 posts

45 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
Pontoneer said:
Zeeky said:
54 Offence of immobilising etc. vehicles

(1)A person commits an offence who, without lawful authority—

(a)immobilises a motor vehicle by the attachment to the vehicle, or a part of it, of an immobilising device, or

(b)moves, or restricts the movement of, such a vehicle by any means,

intending to prevent or inhibit the removal of the vehicle by a person otherwise entitled to remove it.
Another thought is that you could put a sign up stating the daily fee for parking in your car park , say 10% more than the railway car park ( free to customers ) , stating that the fee is payable before leaving .

Then block his car in and only move when he has paid the fee . Until he pays he is not entitled to move it .
Nice interpretation, but if that was right you might as well just clamp his car and demand £150.

Breadvan72

19,759 posts

49 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
Indeed, that interpretation would render the provision ineffective.

Pontoneer

3,464 posts

72 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
Not much different to having an exit barrier which requires a payment before it will go up .

It would have to be tested in court .

Pontoneer

3,464 posts

72 months

[news] 
Sunday 7th October 2012 quote quote all
13th said:
That's difficult as we have a chemist on our site so he could just pop in for a pack of plasters........... it would still be a lot cheaper than the pay and display next to us.
I suppose you could put a time limit ( say two hours free parking for customers ) as some car park operators do , and charge a fee for anyone who wants to park all day ?
1 2
4 5
Reply to Topic