Clamped!

Guy:Incognito

Marlow wrote: »

What tells you, that the owner is getting business from people trying to change. And what margins he has on somebody buying a mars bar compared to somebody buying 70l of fuel ? While he's maybe loosing a few customers that would actually have spend money in the petrol station ?

If garage owners are to be believed, the shops are whats keeping the garage going, not the petrol.

Marlow wrote: »

And this thread is about clamping, the lack of regulation, appeal and somebody who got clamped while he was out buying a ticket. Not somebody who didn't buy a ticket or how to get around to buy a ticket.

/M

But if theres no consequences, why bother paying?

Marlow

Anan1 wrote: »

Does the landowner get money from contract clamping? I don't know, but I don't think so. All the friendly internet people are doing is saving the OP the hassle of having to pay for parking.

It doesn't matter if the owner gets money from the clamping or not. If he doesn't it's an even worse business for him. Because while the car is clamped, he can't even make money from somebody else parking there

The issue at hand is that the clamping isn't regulated, there is no appeals process and that the declamping fine is disproportionate from the parking fee.

/M

Guy:Incognito

Stark wrote: »

And generating a bit of momentum that may result in finally seeing the vultures regulated.

And the people who get clamped having to pay....

Marlow wrote: »

The issue at hand is that the clamping isn't regulated, there is no appeals process and that the declamping fine is disproportionate from the parking fee.

/M

It wouldnt have mattered if it was regulated, the OP was in the wrong. All regulation would have meant is that 2 bodies would have told him to pay the fee.

Stark

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

It wouldnt have mattered if it was regulated, the OP was in the wrong. All regulation would have meant is that 2 bodies would have told him to pay the fee.

If it was regulated, there'd be a clearly defined grace period in which the OP knew he would either have to obtain change and buy a ticket or else leave and come back with change.

At present, you can be clamped walking from your car to the pay machine and back and of course no course of appeal because there's no regulation to stop that from happening. (And it has happened to people in the cases of cowboy operators).

And personally I don't like seeing money being illegally extorted from people, regardless of whether they made a mistake or not.

Marlow

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

It wouldnt have mattered if it was regulated, the OP was in the wrong. All regulation would have meant is that 2 bodies would have told him to pay the fee.

Incorrect. In a functioning world, if the ticket had been timestamped before or in around the same time as the time of the clamping, the clamp would have been released without fee. Due to lack of appeals process, this isn't happening. Well unless a few friendly people give a hand.

I stated this before.

/M

Anan1

Marlow wrote: »

It doesn't matter if the owner gets money from the clamping or not. If he doesn't it's an even worse business for him. Because while the car is clamped, he can't even make money from somebody else parking there

The issue at hand is that the clamping isn't regulated, there is no appeals process and that the declamping fine is disproportionate from the parking fee.

/M

You already know that we're agreed on regulation, so stop trying to pretend that that's the issue. The OP would have been clamped anyway, even with regulation. The issue is your refusal to acknowledge the right of a landowner to lay down and enforce rules for people parking on his land. It is your lack of respect for his rights that necessitates clamping in the first place.

Anan1

Stark wrote: »

If it was regulated, there'd be a clearly defined grace period in which the OP knew he would either have to obtain change and buy a ticket or else leave and come back with change.

At present, you can be clamped walking from your car to the pay machine and back and of course no course of appeal because there's no regulation to stop that from happening. (And it has happened to people in the cases of cowboy operators).

And personally I don't like seeing money being illegally extorted from people, regardless of whether they made a mistake or not.

You do know that the OP was gone for 20 minutes, don't you?

Stark

Which is more or less than the grace period? Care to tell me what the grace period was?

Marlow

Anan1 wrote: »

You already know that we're agreed on regulation, so stop trying to pretend that that's the issue. The OP would have been clamped anyway, even with regulation. The issue is your refusal to acknowledge the right of a landowner to lay down and enforce rules for people parking on his land. It is your lack of respect for his rights that necessitates clamping in the first place.

But that's the point. The landowner DOES NOT have the law to back him up on charging a release fee on clamping people. Otherwise the OPs situation would have been impossible to be resolved in the manner it did.

/M

Guy:Incognito

Marlow wrote: »

Incorrect. In a functioning world, if the ticket had been timestamped before or in around the same time as the time of the clamping, the clamp would have been released without fee. Due to lack of appeals process, this isn't happening. Well unless a few friendly people give a hand.

I stated this before.

/M

You seem to think the machine was miles from the carpark. Lets work on the assumption that th eop bought a ticket, how long do you think it then took him to get back to the car?

Why should it be waived if it's even only a minute after the clamp? Anyone can park, wait for the clampers to arrive then run and get a ticket.

Stark wrote: »

Which is more or less than the grace period? Care to tell me what the grace period was?

Why does there need to be a grace period? Theres usually a machine within a short distance of the car, and in sight of it.

Its not the owners problem if people turn up without change. They are free to drive off and get some

Marlow

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

You seem to think the machine was miles from the carpark. Lets work on the assumption that th eop bought a ticket, how long do you think it then took him to get back to the car?

Why should it be waived if it's even only a minute after the clamp? Anyone can park, wait for the clampers to arrive then run and get a ticket.

Explained in the thread. The op realised he has no change, there is inadequate parking nearby the bank, he didn't have enough money on the card to get cash in the atm, so he decided to walk to the bank, get money from the teller and went back, bought a ticket to find his car clamped. It's all in the thread.

Time: 20 minutes.

/M

Stark

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Why should it be waived if it's even only a minute after the clamp? Anyone can park, wait for the clampers to arrive then run and get a ticket.

Because it takes most people more than a minute to legitimately obtain a ticket and walk back to their cars?

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Why does there need to be a grace period? Theres usually a machine within a short distance of the car, and in sight of it.

Not necessarily. In your wonderful unregulated world, the landowner is free to put the machine whereever the hell he likes.

Guy:Incognito

Marlow wrote: »

Explained in the thread. The op realised he has no change, there is inadequate parking nearby the bank, he didn't have enough money on the card to get cash in the atm, so he decided to walk to the bank, get money from the teller and went back, bought a ticket to find his car clamped. It's all in the thread.

Time: 20 minutes.

/M

How is that anything to do with the timestamp on the ticket? If the owner doesnt want to offer a grace period that that should be that.

Anan1

Marlow wrote: »

But that's the point. The landowner DOES NOT have the law to back him up on charging a release fee on clamping people. Otherwise the OPs situation would have been impossible to be resolved in the manner it did.

/M

I'm not disputing that removing the clamp was legal. And, for the fourth time, I also believe that regulation & independent appeals is long overdue. But - here's the thing - legal does not always mean right. You don't abuse another man's private property, not even when the law allows it. That's what the OP did, and that's why the friendly internet people were crawling around under the OP's van instead of being at home watching tv or whatever.

Guy:Incognito

Stark wrote: »

Because it takes most people more than a minute to legitimately obtain a ticket and walk back to their cars?

Does it? How so? Would you stand at the machine watching the guys pull up and clamp your car? I'd say by the time they arrive, get out to check if you have a ticket, go back to the van, get the clmap and actually fit it, you could walk over.

Stark wrote: »

Not necessarily. In your wonderful unregulated world, the landowner is free to put the machine whereever the hell he likes.

and people are free to go park somewhere else, or park nearer the machine.

Lets look at the reality of it though , how far away are the machines . My guess is they are all in the carparks.

Marlow

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

How is that anything to do with the timestamp on the ticket? If the owner doesnt want to offer a grace period that that should be that.

And because there is no regulation on the landowners rules to the parking he provides, there is no regulation on the person parking there to relief himself of the clamp.

Op stated somewhere in the thread, that he missed the clampers by a minute or thereabouts.

/M

Stark

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

How is that anything to do with the timestamp on the ticket? If the owner doesnt want to offer a grace period that that should be that.

Person parks car at 20:34. Buys ticket at 20:36. Comes back at 20:38 to find car being clamped. You don't consider that as fair grounds for an appeal if an appeals process was offered?

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Does it? How so? Would you stand at the machine watching the guys pull up and clamp your car? I'd say by the time they arrive, get out to check if you have a ticket, go back to the van, get the clmap and actually fit it, you could walk over.

And if the guys clamping the car are physically stronger than me? Several posters have reported incidents where they have seen thugs clamping the car with the owner standing there begging them not to. Often cases elderly people who would have taken their time obtaining a ticket and were too frail to put up a fight. Which would not have happened if they were given a reasonable grace period.

Marlow

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Does it? How so? Would you stand at the machine watching the guys pull up and clamp your car? I'd say by the time they arrive, get out to check if you have a ticket, go back to the van, get the clmap and actually fit it, you could walk over.

And I've seen plenty of clampers, who have clamped the car in the meanwhile and refused to unclamp, even though you show them a ticket.

/M

Guy:Incognito

Marlow wrote: »

And I've seen plenty of clampers, who have clamped the car in the meanwhile and refused to unclamp, even though you show them a ticket.

/M

What ticket? Why would you stand there a few metres away watchign them go through the motions of clamping and say nothing Cos thats what I'm talkign about there.

Walk over and tell them you just pulled in and are gettign a ticket. If they say though, get in the car and drive off.

Anan1

Marlow wrote: »

And I've seen plenty of clampers, who have clamped the car in the meanwhile and refused to unclamp, even though you show them a ticket.

/M

Look, we all know that some clampers are unscrupulous - what does that have to do with this case?

Stark

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

What ticket? Why would you stand there a few metres away watchign them go through the motions of clamping and say nothing Cos thats what I'm talkign about there.

Walk over and tell them you just pulled in and are gettign a ticket. If they say though, get in the car and drive off.

Good lord :rolleyes: There should be no need to have to watch your back while purchasing your ticket. I'm astounded you find the practice of clamping someone while watching them buy their ticket acceptable. An elderly person (who are often the targets of extortionists) just isn't going to be able to walk back, get in their car and drive off while trying to get past a thug who's bigger than them quickly enough.

Marlow

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

What ticket? Why would you stand there a few metres away watchign them go through the motions of clamping and say nothing Cos thats what I'm talkign about there.

Walk over and tell them you just pulled in and are gettign a ticket. If they say though, get in the car and drive off.

That's not always possible. And the pay machine is not always in sight of the car.

/M

Marlow

Anan1 wrote: »

Look, we all know that some clampers are unscrupulous - what does that have to do with this case?

Clamping. And the lack of law backing it up. Charging 90 EUR unclamping fee is extortion and hence unscrupulous. Not having an independant appeals process is even more unscrupulous.

/M

Guy:Incognito

Stark wrote: »

Good lord :rolleyes: There should be no need to have to watch your back while purchasing your ticket. I'm astounded you find the practice of clamping someone while watching them buy their ticket acceptable. An elderly person (who are often the targets of extortionists) just isn't going to be able to walk back, get in their car and drive off while trying to get past a thug who's bigger than them quickly enough.

Good lord indeed , I was responding to your posts that the machines are somehow hidden away a days camel ride from the parking spots.

Stark wrote: »

And if the guys clamping the car are physically stronger than me? .

Is there many cases where people have gone to get in their cars and been wrestled away?



Anyway, are we discussing the op and similar cases or extreme ones where the clampers arrive as you step out of the car? I havnt seen anyone defending that. No one denied you should be able to go get a ticket. Takign 20 minutes is takign the piss.

Is there many cases where the machine is more than a minute (2 mins walking is actuslly a fair distance) away?

Marlow

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Is there many cases where people have gone to get in their cars and been wrestled away?

There's been a few examples mentioned in this very thread.

/M

Anan1

Stark wrote: »

Which would not have happened if they were given a reasonable grace period.

There's a 15 minute grace period in Dún Laoghaire, which is many times longer than you need to get a ticket and actually covers most errands. The grace period should be enough to ensure that you can comfortably get a ticket, and it should be clearly signposted. What it does not need to cover is somebody arriving without coins and then wandering around for 20 minutes trying to find change.

Marlow wrote: »

Clamping. And the lack of law backing it up. Charging 90 EUR unclamping fee is a extortion and hence unscrupulous. Not having an independant appeals process is even more unscrupulous.

/M

Yeah yeah, we should have regulation. In the meantime, if you don't like the rules then don't park there. Especially not for 20 minutes without paying.

Marlow

Anan1 wrote: »

In the meantime, if you don't like the rules then don't park there. Especially not for 20 minutes without paying.

Or unclamp yourself until regulation is in place.

/M

Stark

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Is there many cases where people have gone to get in their cars and been wrestled away?

If someone is in the process of clamping the car, I would need to be as strong or stronger than them to pull them away from the clamp. I'm still astounded that you consider it acceptable that they should continue doing so after you've shown them your ticket. Not even Anan1 is trying to justify that.

Anan1 wrote:

There's a 15 minute grace period in Dún Laoghaire, which is many times longer than you need to get a ticket and actually covers most errands. The grace period should be enough to ensure that you can comfortably get a ticket, and it should be clearly signposted.

As it should be.

Anan1 wrote:

What it does not need to cover is somebody arriving without coins and then wandering around for 20 minutes trying to find change.

Well without any grace period signed, how is the OP meant to know if it's 15 mins or 20 mins. If it was signed as 15 mins, he would have known to return to his car when he found himself running short on time. Since there are no rules covering how private clampers display and enforce this, it's impossible to respect them. Even if it was 5 minutes clearly signed, then the person parking would be able to obtain their ticket in that time safe in the knowledge that they weren't going to return ticket in hand to find a yellow boot.

Anan1

Stark wrote: »

If someone is in the process of clamping the car, I would need to be as strong or stronger than them to pull them away from the clamp. I'm still astounded that you consider it acceptable that they should continue doing so after you've shown them your ticket. Not even Anan1 is trying to justify that.

I think the point here is that the landowner has a right to set whatever rules they please, but that they have a duty to make any potential customers aware of these in advance. That way, you can make an informed decision on whether or not you want to do business with them.

Guy:Incognito

https://maps.google.ie/maps?q=dublin+road,+naas&hl=en&ll=53.22099,-6.658459&spn=0.001457,0.003731&sll=53.344104,-6.267494&sspn=0.371809,0.955124&t=h&hnear=Dublin+Rd,+Naas,+County+Kildare&z=19&layer=c&cbll=53.22099,-6.658459&panoid=5dFZPb4QHl3xe1oa_IQe_g&cbp=12,132.44,,0,-4.3

Is that where we're talking about btw?

Stark wrote: »

Well without any grace period signed, how is the OP meant to know if it's 15 mins or 20 mins. If it was signed as 15 mins, he would have known to return to his car when he found himself running short on time.

If its not signed then there isnt one. Why would you just pick a time and assume it to be true?

I doubt theres a case that 5 mins wouldnt cover.

Anan1

Marlow wrote: »

Or unclamp yourself until regulation is in place.

/M

If you have no respect for the property rights of others.

RUCKING FETARD

7+ pages of extra Bull**** today (thanks Anan1) to add to the 10 or so before it that ruined the best Thread in over 6 months site wide.

Wonder would a Mod delete everything back to post 238 on pg16 except for post 337 and 338 on pg23 and lock the Thread?

And get one of the AH mods to add it to the Legendary Thread.

Well done Kildare, Gary, Yawns and brummy.

Guy:Incognito

Marlow wrote: »

There's been a few examples mentioned in this very thread.

/M

Well then an assault charge should have been handy to secure.

Guy:Incognito

RUCKING FETARD wrote: »

7+ pages of extra Bull**** today (thanks Anan1) to add to the 10 or so before it that ruined the best Thread in over 6 months site wide.

Wonder would a Mod delete everything back to post 238 on pg16 except for post 337 and 338 on pg23 and lock the Thread?

And get one of the AH mods to add it to the Legendary Thread.

Delete it why? Because people dont like clampers and just want a free rant? Why not just have all threads one sided and ban reasoned debate?

Stark

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Well then an assault charge should have been handy to secure.

And someone parking their car should be forced to deal with this why?

Anan1 wrote:

If you have no respect for the property rights of others.

A car is property too.

Marlow

Anan1 wrote: »

I think the point here is that the landowner has a right to set whatever rules they please, but that they have a duty to make any potential customers aware of these in advance. That way, you can make an informed decision on whether or not you want to do business with them.

Stark wrote: »

Well without any grace period signed, how is the OP meant to know if it's 15 mins or 20 mins. If it was signed as 15 mins, he would have known to return to his car when he found himself running short on time.

But you can only do that, if there is enough information. Like a clearly stated grace period, where the machines are, what payment methods they take etc. With lack of information the grace period needs to be extend.

Anan1 wrote: »

If you have no respect for the property rights of others.

If we go by your assumption, that the landowner gets no money from the clamping, then it makes no difference to the landowner if you declamp yourself or you pay the declamp fee. The op stated, he paid the ticket, so he's paid the landowner for the privilege to park there.

No disrespect to the landowner in that case.

/M

Guy:Incognito

Marlow wrote: »

Or unclamp yourself until regulation is in place.

/M

and yet again, why bother paying for parking in the first place then? PArk where you want.

Dont worm out of it with talk of the OP, your being general now.

Paparazzo

Anan1 wrote: »

If you have no respect for the property rights of others.

Jesus, you're using that line to support clamping! We've turned full circle. It's the ones stopping someone from using their own car cos they're a few minutes late paying a couple of euro are the ones getting the rights abused!
I've heard the lot now

Guy:Incognito

Stark wrote: »

And someone parking their car should be forced to deal with this why?

.

Who said they should? But apparently they already have so I'm assumeing they won their case and the clampers now have convictions for assault?

beertons

Great result lads, well done.

Stark

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Who said they should? But apparently they already have so I'm assumeing they won their case and the clampers now have convictions for assault?

It would be difficult to obtain a successful conviction for assault for someone simply standing between you and your car. Pretty much every nightclub bouncer in the country would be done for assault if that was the case. In any case, the clampers are relying on people's fear and ignorance of the law in order to go about their business. If everyone was using the law to their successful advantage, the clampers wouldn't be able to operate.

Anan1

Marlow wrote: »

But you can only do that, if there is enough information. Like a clearly stated grace period, where the machines are, what payment methods they take etc. With lack of information the grace period needs to be extend.

Agreed, but common-sense will tell anyone that it's not 20 minutes.

Marlow wrote: »

If we go by your assumption, that the landowner gets no money from the clamping, then it makes no difference to the landowner if you declamp yourself or you pay the declamp fee. The op stated, he paid the ticket, so he's paid the landowner for the privilege to park there.

No disrespect to the landowner in that case.

/M

If the OP did pay then it made no difference to the landowner, the clampers were down the amount of time it took them to attach the clamp, and the boardsies were down the time it took them to get there, crawl under the OP's van, pull apart the suspension, remove the clamp, reassemble, go home and clean up. This is why I find the idea that the boardsies somehow won to be a bit ridiculous.

Guy:Incognito

Stark wrote: »

It would be difficult to obtain a successful conviction for assault for someone simply standing between you and your car. Pretty much every nightclub bouncer in the country would be done for assault if that was the case. In any case, the clampers are relying on people's fear and ignorance of the law in order to go about their business. If everyone was using the law to their successful advantage, the clampers wouldn't be able to operate.

I asked if people were wrestled away from their cars when tryign to get in and Marlow said yes they were. Yours is the first mention of the clampers standing in front of them.

Stark

Anan1 wrote:

Agreed, but common-sense will tell anyone that it's not 20 minutes.

Telling someone they should figure out the rules using common sense just isn't good enough. Not when you're preparing to stick your hand in their pocket and take out €120 for not understanding them.

Anan1

Paparazzo wrote: »

Jesus, you're using that line to support clamping! We've turned full circle. It's the ones stopping someone from using their own car cos they're a few minutes late paying a couple of euro are the ones getting the rights abused!
I've heard the lot now

They don't put the car park under your car while you're away, you choose to park there. If you don't like the rules then park elsewhere.

Stark wrote: »

Telling someone they should figure out the rules using common sense just isn't good enough. Not when you're preparing to stick your hand in their pocket and take out €120 for not understanding them.

In principle I agree with you, and I do think that grace periods should be clearly signposted, but, seriously - 20 minutes? The biggest halfwit in Ireland would know that that's not going to fly.

Stark

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

I asked if people were wrestled away from their cars when tryign to get in and Marlow said yes they were. Yours is the first mention of the clampers standing in front of them.

It's quite easy to use bully tactics on a vulnerable person and get away with it. We're quite good at it in this country.

Marlow

Anan1 wrote: »

If the OP did pay then it made no difference to the landowner, the clampers were down the amount of time it took them to attach the clamp, and the boardsies were down the time it took them to get there, crawl under the OP's van, pull apart the suspension, remove the clamp, reassemble, go home and clean up. This is why I find the idea that the boardsies somehow won to be a bit ridiculous.

That's because you don't find it worthwhile. They however did. And so do the majority of the posters here.

/M

Guy:Incognito

Stark wrote: »

Telling someone they should figure out the rules using common sense just isn't good enough. .

No one said figure out the rules themselves. If the sign doesnt say you have a 20 min grace period, then dont just go ahead and assume you do.

Gary ITR

Anan1 wrote: »

Agreed, but common-sense will tell anyone that it's not 20 minutes.


If the OP did pay then it made no difference to the landowner, the clampers were down the amount of time it took them to attach the clamp, and the boardsies were down the time it took them to get there, crawl under the OP's van, pull apart the suspension, remove the clamp, reassemble, go home and clean up. This is why I find the idea that the boardsies somehow won to be a bit ridiculous.

Just on your final point, it was one bolt there was no crawling. Plus i needed to go to the shop anyway plus i got to meet and have a chat with some cool lads, all in all it was a goodevening

Guy:Incognito

Marlow wrote: »

That's because you don't find it worthwhile. They however did. And so do the majority of the posters here.

/M

Thats because the majority are int he "rabble rabble, ****ing clampers " camp. How many car park owners are agreeing?

Sure people have been on giving out about clamping in their aparments or estates when they are the ones employing them through a management company. Ah ignorance, eh?


Anyway, just in case you missed it:

Marlow wrote: »

Or unclamp yourself until regulation is in place.

/M

and yet again, why bother paying for parking in the first place then? PArk where you want.

Dont worm out of it with talk of the OP, your being general now.