PSV driver and just got clamped

Paulw

Johnboy Mac wrote: »

So you (the so called professional driver with the PSV licence) need lines on the road to tell how to drive/park correctly? I've heard enough!

Ah, come on now. Don't you know that a PSV license gives you the right to stop/park anywhere you want?

Isn't that why there are so many PSV licenses out there, because according to taxi drivers, they can't make a living from it, so there has to be a reason for people to get a PSV license.

As for just getting out of the car to get a fare .... car must have been parked at least 10-15 mins, because those guys aren't that quick at clamping. It takes at least 5-10 mins.

No sympathy at all.

Lord Nikon

I rang them today and explained the situation, they will be sending me a refund. The written notice says yellow lines, instead of yellow box.

Technicality ftw.

Seinas

referring to you saying it was a worn to nothing yellow box, i know of a man in Cork who went outside on the street outside his house and painted over the white parking lines and extended the double yellow lines. Cars that are in fact parking legally but their wheels are slighty over 'his' yellow lines, he rings up and reports them and they get carried away by the tow truck. Surely this isnt right!!:eek:

stealthyspeeder

Stekelly wrote: »

So whats the solution? You go ahead and park whereever suites, they come along, shrug and walk off? Your car is parked illegally but who cares.

If thats the case everytime I want to go shopping in town (Dublin) I'll just chuck my car up on the central median on O'Connell street and **** whoever doesnt like it, as long as it's handy for me. Sure I'm only running into the shop for a minute:rolleyes:.

Possbile solutions could be removing the car to an impound by either a government body or a priately contracted non commision priate removal company. Or let the guards deal with it if the parking is against the law.

Just because there is a problem, and a solution has been attempted and is now common practice, does not make it right. Clamping is not right as it further aggrivates the problem it is in place to solve, its existance is meant to deter illegal parking, yet when it doesn't succeed, it ends up commiting the crime of extortion on the said motorist. Two wrongs do not make a right.

mumof2

Seinas wrote: »

referring to you saying it was a worn to nothing yellow box, i know of a man in Cork who went outside on the street outside his house and painted over the white parking lines and extended the double yellow lines. Cars that are in fact parking legally but their wheels are slighty over 'his' yellow lines, he rings up and reports them and they get carried away by the tow truck. Surely this isnt right!!:eek:

:eek::eek:How can he get away with that??

Mind you it's a good idea:D

Berty

I think we can take the following message from the opening problem and the solution the OP received.

He parked wherever he felt like knowing it was a yellow box, faded or not and then complained about getting clamped.

Following his appeal to the clampers they refunded his payment because of a clerical error.

Long story short. The OP learned nothing and will continue to park wherever he feels like.*





*my assumption

Guy:Incognito

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

Possbile solutions could be removing the car to an impound by either a government body or a priately contracted non commision priate removal company. Or let the guards deal with it if the parking is against the law.

Just because there is a problem, and a solution has been attempted and is now common practice, does not make it right. Clamping is not right as it further aggrivates the problem it is in place to solve, its existance is meant to deter illegal parking, yet when it doesn't succeed, it ends up commiting the crime of extortion on the said motorist. Two wrongs do not make a right.

If its committing a crime of extortion then surely your implying that if they dotn force you to stay and pay youd otherwise leg it? Seeing as how there would be a fine either way?

Clamping is cheaper, easier and faster than having to get a recovery truck out for every car. It's also far less hassle for the car owner to be able to pay at the scene and sort it out rather than making their way to the nearest impound (without a car)


Would you be happier to pay more and to have to travel to the impound to get your car back, just so they didnt actually put a clamp on it (and "exort" money form you)? If so, why?


I've not seen cars clamped in dangerous places or blocking traffic, they generally lift the cars if they are in the way.

stealthyspeeder

Stekelly wrote: »

If its committing a crime of extortion then surely your implying that if they dotn force you to stay and pay youd otherwise leg it? Seeing as how there would be a fine either way?

Clamping is cheaper, easier and faster than having to get a recovery truck out for every car. It's also far less hassle for the car owner to be able to pay at the scene and sort it out rather than making their way to the nearest impound (without a car)


Would you be happier to pay more and to have to travel to the impound to get your car back, just so they didnt actually put a clamp on it (and "exort" money form you)? If so, why?


I've not seen cars clamped in dangerous places or blocking traffic, they generally lift the cars if they are in the way.

By extortion I mean that until youpay, you will not have use of your car.
(their action renders your property unusable, and unless you pay them you cannot continue to use what is rightfully yours) This is sounds in basic principle like organised crime extortion. This does not sound like proper behaviour for a city council to be engaging in. I would be able to contest a fine in court at a later date if I felt it was unjust. If I felt it was just, I would pay it. If I refused to pay it, the council could take me to court. All this would involve me using my car in the mean time and being treated prooperly by the state (innocent until proven guilty)

Clamping may be faster, cheaper and easier than getting a recovery truck, but it makes the motorist continue to defy the parking rules for longer than neccesary. Recovery truck would not exacerbate the problem but actually solve it, and deter it from happening in future. If the motorist has parked illegally and you think they should be clamped, do you now think its not ok that they should have the hassle of going to an impound?

I wouldnt be happy at all if my car was impounded, I was not happy when it was clamped. Its not something to be happy about at all. I would see more logic in it being removed as punishment, than by keeping it where it is by force, to punish the crime of putting it there in the first place.

So if the cars are not in dangerous places or causing an obstruction, but clamped for this, it really begs the question.... do they deserve to be immobilised and extorted for this? If the answer to this is by some twist yes, then why not do it properly and remove them?

Guy:Incognito

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

By extortion I mean that until youpay, you will not have use of your car.

So the same as if it's towed then?

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

(their action renders your property unusable, and unless you pay them you cannot continue to use what is rightfully yours)

If your parked in a pay parking spot without paying are you not stoppign them from makign money from whats rightfully theirs?

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

I would see more logic in it being removed as punishment, than by keeping it where it is by force, to punish the crime of putting it there in the first place.

The fine is the punishment.

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

So if the cars are not in dangerous places or causing an obstruction, but clamped for this, it really begs the question.... do they deserve to be immobilised and extorted for this? If the answer to this is by some twist yes, then why not do it properly and remove them?

Because, as stated, it takes longer and costs more. To you, to them.


I love how you throw in the "by some twist"bit. Implyign that you are automatically right and should I disagree, then I am mad.


The simple fact is, dotn park where you shouldnt and it'll never be an issue to you.

BostonB

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

By extortion I mean that until youpay, you will not have use of your car.
(their action renders your property unusable, and unless you pay them you cannot continue to use what is rightfully yours) This is sounds in basic principle like organised crime extortion. This does not sound like proper behaviour for a city council to be engaging in. I would be able to contest a fine in court at a later date if I felt it was unjust. If I felt it was just, I would pay it. If I refused to pay it, the council could take me to court. All this would involve me using my car in the mean time and being treated prooperly by the state (innocent until proven guilty)....

The cost of doing that would be thousands, not to mention the waste of resources.

stealthyspeeder

Stekelly wrote: »

So the same as if it's towed then?

If your parked in a pay parking spot without paying are you not stoppign them from makign money from whats rightfully theirs?

The fine is the punishment.

Because, as stated, it takes longer and costs more. To you, to them.


I love how you throw in the "by some twist"bit. Implyign that you are automatically right and should I disagree, then I am mad.


The simple fact is, dotn park where you shouldnt and it'll never be an issue to you.

Apologies, I dont know how to do multi quotes!

1.No not the same as if it towed, all the impound would have to do, would be take my details from my driving license and use these details to issue the fine to. No extortion, done properly.

2.Yes you would be stopping them making money, hence taking the car to an impound would free the space up for them to make money from it.

3.There two aspects of punishment to the act of clamping, the fine (which could be got legally using other means) and the immobilisation of your car until a removal van comes. This may be of greater punishment to someone than the fine depeending on their wealth and time constraints

4. If they deserved to be clamped, they deserved to be removed. If they dont deserve to be removed, they dont deserved to be clamped. Simple as! justifing criminal damage and extortion because it is cheaper and easier than doing something right is unacceptable.

5. I have parked legally and in accordance with the posted signs and been clamped. I was extorted, and I missed an important family event due to the calmp removal van taking over two hours too arrive to me (im aware my hatred of clampers may have grown from this seed!)

mikemac

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

Simple as! justifing criminal damage and extortion because it is cheaper and easier than doing something right is unacceptable.

Maybe I missed it in another post but did the clampers damage your car?

stealthyspeeder

mikemac wrote: »

Maybe I missed it in another post but did the clampers damage your car?

Criminal damage also includes rendering someones property unfit to use for its purpose by an action

pred racer

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

By extortion I mean that until youpay, you will not have use of your car.
(their action renders your property unusable, and unless you pay them you cannot continue to use what is rightfully yours) This is sounds in basic principle like organised crime extortion. This does not sound like proper behaviour for a city council to be engaging in. I would be able to contest a fine in court at a later date if I felt it was unjust. If I felt it was just, I would pay it. If I refused to pay it, the council could take me to court. All this would involve me using my car in the mean time and being treated prooperly by the state (innocent until proven guilty)

Never been clamped, but Im with you on this. whats wrong with a parking ticket? may cost the same to the illegal parkee but uses no resources (except for some shoe leather on some flat feet) they get their money, you get a slap on the wrists....and best of all you could still come on d'net and bitch about it:rolleyes:

meathstevie

BostonB wrote: »

The reason for it being there hasn't disappeared.

I suggest you use that logic when you let the numerals on your car registration plate fade to nothing and don't fix them and don't pay the fixed penalty. When in court you can use your logic as demonstrated as a defence, see how far you get....

Guy:Incognito

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

Criminal damage also includes rendering someones property unfit to use for its purpose by an action

It will generally take longer to discover your car gone then get to an impound than to get it unclamped, so is that not more "extortionate" than the clamp?

You dotn have the use of your car when it's in the impound.

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

3.There two aspects of punishment to the act of clamping, the fine (which could be got legally using other means) and the immobilisation of your car until a removal van comes. This may be of greater punishment to someone than the fine depeending on their wealth and time constraints

The act of clamping is just to make sure you pay the punishment (fine), not a punishment in itself.

BostonB

The whole point is to inconvenience the offender. No?

stealthyspeeder

Stekelly wrote: »

It will generally take longer to discover your car gone then get to an impound than to get it unclamped, so is that not more "extortionate" than the clamp?

You dont have the use of your car when it's in the impound.

The act of clamping is just to make sure you pay the punishment (fine), not a punishment in itself.

Its not unusable when it has been put somewhere else, it commom sense you have to be beside and then in your car to use it. (you just happen to not be in the right place, if you had broken the law with a gun and left it somewhere public, you would not expect it to be there on your return) If you went to the impound gave your details and paid the fine later, then you would not be being extorted. Yes it would be inconvienant to get to the impound but the removal of your car will have stopped you from breaking the parking law for a longer period of time.

If the fines were legally justifyable, then would it not be better to pursue the collection of money from these fines through a legal process rather than one which extorts people, assumes their guilty and forces them to pay to use what is theirs? (ie. proper guards, proper judge, proper penalty rather than all of these rolled into one in the form of a clamping company who benefit from the defendants detriment)

BostonB

Way to make something simple, complicated and cost about 10 times as much, take years, and far be less effective and tie up the legal process. What a waste of resources.

Guy:Incognito

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

Its not unusable when it has been put somewhere else, it commom sense you have to be beside and then in your car to use it. (you just happen to not be in the right place, if you had broken the law with a gun and left it somewhere public, you would not expect it to be there on your return) If you went to the impound gave your details and paid the fine later, then you would not be being extorted. Yes it would be inconvienant to get to the impound but the removal of your car will have stopped you from breaking the parking law for a longer period of time.

So in short , towing your car is far more "extorionate " than clamping it seeing as it takes longer (or have you moved on from that and changed your point)?

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

.

If the fines were legally justifyable, then would it not be better to pursue the collection of money from these fines through a legal process rather than one which extorts people, assumes their guilty and forces them to pay to use what is theirs? (ie. proper guards, proper judge, proper penalty rather than all of these rolled into one in the form of a clamping company who benefit from the defendants detriment)

You seem determined to use the word extorte as much as possible.Whats the difference which method is use (other than you having a hissy fit about being clamped and crying "extortion" like some edwardian villian) seeing as you dont have use of your car either way?

The whole point of on the spot and posted out fines is to free up the people in your list. If every speeding and parking fine had to go to court with Gards present they would have to work round the clock and a huge percentage of the Gards in the country would never spend any of their working life outside a courtroom.

The cheapest and easiest way for the people issueing the fines the better. They see that as being clamping so therefore thats right. You dont have to commit any offernce but when you do you play by the rules they set. Same as if you invite me into your house, just because I'm in there doesnt mean I can do whatever the hell I feel like.

stealthyspeeder

BostonB wrote: »

Way to make something simple, complicated and cost about 10 times as much, take years, and far be less effective and tie up the legal process. What a waste of resources.

Way to make decisions about right and wrong based on economics, you should get a job in the government, untill then let them worry about the logistics of it and focus on in the disscussion going on about whats right in principle.

Guy:Incognito

stealthyspeeder wrote: »

Way to make decisions about right and wrong based on economics, you should get a job in the government, untill then let them worry about the logistics of it and focus on in the disscussion going on about whats right in principle.

Being right in principal would be parking properly in the first place. You cant commit an offence then go whinging that the rules ( that are clearly defined before you chose to break them) are worng in principal.

This is a stupid arguement and I'm walking away.
If you dont want to be clamped, dont park illegaly of contravene rules of car parks set out by the owners (your on their property, do as they say or dont use their facilities). It really is as simpe as that.

stealthyspeeder

Stekelly wrote: »

So in short , towing your car is far more "extorionate " than clamping it seeing as it takes longer (or have you moved on from that and changed your point)?



You seem determined to use the word extorte as much as possible.Whats the difference which method is use (other than you having a hissy fit about being clamped and crying "extortion" like some edwardian villian) seeing as you dont have use of your car either way?

The whole point of on the spot and posted out fines is to free up the people in your list. If every speeding and parking fine had to go to court with Gards present they would have to work round the clock and a huge percentage of the Gards in the country would never spend any of their working life outside a courtroom.

The cheapest and easiest way for the people issueing the fines the better. They see that as being clamping so therefore thats right. You dont have to commit any offernce but when you do you play by the rules they set. Same as if you invite me into your house, just because I'm in there doesnt mean I can do whatever the hell I feel like.

If you know where the impound is, it could be quicker than waiting on a removal van.

I've outlined the differnces quiter clearly in my posts between clamping and removal, wouldnt wanna repeat myself in case someone noticed.............

Do you think many people would go to court over their posted fine? I dont. Bit like motoring fines, a small percentage are contested. The guards are there to see that the rules of the land are enforced rather than people or companies taking it into their own hands. If you think that is inappropriate, then that is a seperate argument.

"The cheapest and easiest way for the people issueing the fines the better. They see that as being clamping so therefore thats right"

Im sorry, but everything you have said up untill this (although it has been at the opposite end of the spectrum from my point of view) has been intelligent and well put, but that statement doesnt deserve a response other than plain old NO.

Great exammple on your last point. If you came to my house, you would not be entitled to, say break my plates, but if you did, I would not be entitled take anything of yours, or assault you because I was plain angry, or imprison you in my house untill you paid me. I would however be entitled to remove you by reasonable force and call the guards.

FrancieB

Are you a negro by any chance? Lots of rascist wardens out there.

Anan1

FrancieB wrote: »

Are you a negro by any chance? Lots of rascist wardens out there.

I don't think the OP was in the car when it was clamped...

Guy:Incognito

FrancieB wrote: »

Are you a negro by any chance? Lots of rascist wardens out there.

Negro? Are we in an Ediie Murphy film now or what?(old, cool eddie of course):)


Is traffic warden the racists choice of employment?

Anan1 wrote: »

I don't think the OP was in the car when it was clamped...

Maybe he drives a black car?:)

FrancieB

Stekelly wrote: »

Negro? Are we in an Ediie Murphy film now or what?(old, cool eddie of course):)


Is traffic warden the racists choice of employment?




Maybe he drives a black car?:)

Possibly.

Lord Nikon

Mmm, all this legal talk has got me thinking...

Should the owner of the said property have put up a No Trespassing sign instead, so that legally they could prosecute me for entering their property. Do they have the right to detain my property unless I pay them a fee.

If someone parks on my driveway which is private property, do I have the right to detain their property and demand monies for release of their property?

Guy:Incognito

neuromancer wrote: »

If someone parks on my driveway which is private property, do I have the right to detain their property and demand monies for release of their property?

No without signage of some sort at the very least I would think.

Cabaal

neuromancer wrote: »

Mmm, all this legal talk has got me thinking...

<snip>

If someone parks on my driveway which is private property, do I have the right to detain their property and demand monies for release of their property?

I'm sure you could do something if someone was thick enough to park in your drive way in much the same way that somebody is thick enough to park in yellow boxes etc and bitch when they get clamped...but who would be stupid enough to park IN your driveway?
`