Response please... re: private parking tickets / clamping

[iAlex]

Email received is as follows;

"Sir... under the current act you can drive into xx supermarket or xx bowling alley and come out with a £105 fine. A fine is a levy issued under an act of parliament... See Magna Carta! The use of current legislation in private parking is ste and always has been. I own a housing development, next to a football stadium and I charge the tenants £12 a month to ensure they can park at their homes, then some tosser in a BMW parks in their place at 2:15 on a Saturday so what do you do? CLAMP the fker and the other 34 that have done the same thing. The new legislation will do nothing for their cause!"

Now as far as I'm concerned the above is rubbish, the 'fine' bit certainly is but I'm struggling with putting any weight behind my argument in response.

Bit of a childish argument to be fair but this bloke thinks he knows everything!

[GKP]

Private individuals or companies can't issue fines.

[frosted]

I got a ticket from euro car parks for parking in a mother and child space . Still wondering if to pay it .

However , thank fk ppl can't clamp no more , have no pity for them .

[iAlex]

I just need a short and snappy come back with some relevant legal bits in it.

[james_tigerwoods]

iAlex said:

I just need a short and snappy come back with some relevant legal bits in it.

"F*** off - See Arkell v. Pressdram (1971)"

Sorry, not helpful

Posted before someone else does

[sklar]

frosted said:

I got a ticket from euro car parks for parking in a mother and child space . Still wondering if to pay it .

However , thank fk ppl can't clamp no more , have no pity for them .

Have a look at the many threads on this. Basically do not contact them, ignore their letters. It's not a fine - it's an invoice. If they take you to court, which they wont, the best they could get out of you is a couple of pounds for the price of the parking.

Edited to add: They got your details from the DVLA computer. They have no idea who was driving. Could be anyone. It's not a legal responsibility to tell them who was driving like a speeding ticket.

Have a look here:

http://forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t3...

Edited by sklar on Wednesday 18th August 09:55

[F i F]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

this ^^, exactly this.

Oh and remind him that as developer / landowner if he employs a clamper who does not FULLY comply with the current legislation, such as it is, then he is also currently liable for a fine of several thousands of pounds and/or a term of imprisonment at Her Majesty's pleasure.

[bobbylondonuk]

What is the legality if the person finds all 4 tyres deflated? not slashed...just deflated?

[F i F]

Would it be pertinent to ask why you are communicating with this person? Otherwise it's difficult to understand the context.

For example your reply might be entirely different if you were a prospective tenant as opposed to somebody who might have been clamped or given a parking "invoice."

[iAlex]

Its just a debate between colleagues really - he commented that as clamping was about to be made illegal he was going to come and park on my private land and see how I liked it sort of thing.

I commented that I couldn't legally clamp him on my driveway anyway as I'm not SIA licensed.

His response was as per my OP to which I replied that the important thing to remember is that PPC's are not backed by any aspect of criminal law but that local authority TW's and police are and that there are provisions for them in the Road Traffic Act 1991 that allow sanctions that the issuing authority can take.

I said that therefore PPC's cannot issue 'fines' and their demands for money aren't worth the paper they are written on.

Now his response was;

Actually Alex, it's the Road Traffic Regulations Act 1988, the RTA 84, the Highways Act 84 and the Traffic Management Act 2004 and that private management companies are covered by the SIA and regulated by the trade body The British Parking Association.

Help me with a response to THAT one?

[iAlex]

Yeah, deliberately argumentative. He's not really going to park on my land just making a point.

I still don't like to back down.

[F i F]

He is being a tt.

HTH

The SIA is effectively toothless beyond saying that frontline staff should be registered and display their badge. Nothing about operational procedure afaik. And if clampers are operating outside SIA rules, and making a complaint to the police results in nothing more than a "It's a civil matter sir" then what's the point?

BPA is only a trade body with a very dubious record. In fact when they were criticised on matters of PPC fees and their code of practice they rewrote their CofP to eliminate limits on fees. Also membership of BPA is not compulsory so that's a useless gambit on his behalf too.

The base problem as we've discussed on various threads is that there ARE two sides to the argument. If some drivers did not deny landowners free use of their own property by parking without permission and without consideration the private parking industry would not exist. If some PPC companies did not take the utter piss in so many ways, and in the process commit criminal offences, then there would be no need for legislation.

Unfortunately there is an element on both sides who do behave completely unreasonably and thus there is the need for legislation. As always some of the people in the middle who do not misbehave may end up suffering if the legislation is not drafted very carefully and precisely.

As far as him threatening to park in your space, threaten to have his clamper's operation investigated and if found deficient he and they will be reported to police and trading standards and hopefully he will get some chokey.

btw did I say to tell him he's being a tt and should get on with some work. Charging his tenanats £12 a month. .

Sorry, pardon my French.

edited for typo's. apologies.

Edited by F i F on Wednesday 18th August 11:50

[iAlex]

Gone back with something along those lines. I wonder if he will bother replying, I'd hope he has better things to do with his time! Me, nope, I'm on annual leave.

[balls-out]

bobbylondonuk said:

What is the legality if the person finds all 4 tyres deflated? not slashed...just deflated?

Possibly criminal dammage? The car will be un-drivable and the owner cannot reasonably be expected to have a suitable pump to re-inflate all the tyres, so a recovery vehicle could be called out and costs (ie dammage) incurred?

[Wyvern971]

balls-out said:

bobbylondonuk said:

What is the legality if the person finds all 4 tyres deflated? not slashed...just deflated?

Possibly criminal dammage? The car will be un-drivable and the owner cannot reasonably be expected to have a suitable pump to re-inflate all the tyres, so a recovery vehicle could be called out and costs (ie dammage) incurred?

Leave a foot pump by the car?

[F i F]

Just a thought, for his £12 a month he is charging his tenants he could have installed access posts on every parking space by now. But that wouldn't make him £12 a month plus brown paper envelopes from the clamping outfit would it? Thought not.

Bet he doesn't declare that. Throw an HMRC investigation into the equation.

Go on you know you want to...

[Ean218]

F i F said:

Just a thought, for his £12 a month he is charging his tenants he could have installed access posts on every parking space by now. But that wouldn't make him £12 a month plus brown paper envelopes from the clamping outfit would it? Thought not.

Hardly. For £144 per year he is supplying approx 60 square foot of land for the tenant to park on. That is a very cheap rate with nothing left for "infrastructure improvements"!

There would be little point in not declaring any money from the clampers as it would just offset all his other costs for tax.

Why do people not realise there is a cause and effect here. Don't park on someone else's property without permission, then clampers would not exist. There are bad clampers, but just as there are bad, inconsiderate and selfish parkers, I fail to distinguish between the two.