Clamped!

Stark

Anan1 wrote: »

squod wrote: »

Oh FFS. You're posting on here longer than I am. Go look up the last hundred threads.

Like I said, i've never seen anyone present evidence that private clamping is illegal. I've seen S.113 misquoted many times, but that's about the size of it. Can you show me that it's illegal, as opposed to just telling me?

Why don't you read the law society article that I posted twice

Bruthal

Anan1 wrote: »

If I want to buy a newspaper, I bring money. If I want to park my car, I bring change. I don't leave the car without a ticket and head off for 20 mins.

No, I don`t suppose you do.

Sorry, but I don't know what you're talking about here.

No, I still don`t suppose you do.

Anan1

Stark wrote: »

Why don't you read the law society article that I posted twice

I did.

BUBBLE WRAP

Wexfordian wrote: »

In fairness Anan categorically and at length stated he isn't and never has been a clamper, I think in direct reply to one of your posts.

Oh right, i couldnt find it. But its grand.

Damie

Anan1 wrote: »

robbie7730 wrote: »

O, you think I`m having difficulty understanding you`re sentence there?

Its the OP going off to get money to pay for the parking, but this means he has no respect for the owner, that i am having difficulty with.

If you respect the owner then you follow their rules when in their car park. If their rules are that you display a ticket when parked then that's what you do.

well you've been warned not to post in this thread again, I await to see the sanction imposed on you, then again, its who you know on this forum by the look of it!

eth0

There is always one notorious pro-clamping fella in every single thread about clamping who just wont give up and realise that clamping is bad all round and that there isnt a single good thing to say about it.

Damie

Damie wrote: »

.......... I await to see the sanction imposed on you...............

What visibility do you have on any sanctions imposed on anyone on boards.ie except the banlist? You might be waiting a while to see anything

Damie

RoverJames wrote: »

Damie wrote: »

.......... I await to see the sanction imposed on you...............

What visibility do you have on any sanctions imposed on anyone on boards.ie except the banlist? You might be waiting a while to see anything

Red and yellow cards....

Damie

Damie wrote: »

Red and yellow cards....

.... so you'll be looking for one to appear at which post? savage strategy in fairness.

Bruthal

Damie wrote: »

Red and yellow cards....

There might have been pm`s.

ANXIOUS

Anan1 wrote: »

Like I said, i've never seen anyone present evidence that private clamping is illegal. I've seen S.113 misquoted many times, but that's about the size of it. Can you show me that it's illegal, as opposed to just telling me?

Okay how about this? You show us that clamping is legal. The amount of people on here that have said they have removed a clamp by cutting the lock and nothing has happened. Surely if clamping was legal, the campers would make an example out of them and publish the cash everywhere ala fines for not having a train ticket. A few pages by the judge in waterford threw out the case. Can you link anything?

Anan1

ANXIOUS wrote: »

Okay how about this? You show us that clamping is legal. The amount of people on here that have said they have removed a clamp by cutting the lock and nothing has happened. Surely if clamping was legal, the campers would make an example out of them and publish the cash everywhere ala fines for not having a train ticket. A few pages by the judge in waterford threw out the case. Can you link anything?

You're saying that because it's not illegal to remove a clamp it must therefore be illegal to affix one? That makes no sense.

ANXIOUS

Anan1 wrote: »

You're saying that because it's not illegal to remove a clamp it must therefore be illegal to affix one? That makes no sense.

Okay, show me a law that says clamping is legal by a private company?

Anan1

ANXIOUS wrote: »

Okay, show me a law that says clamping is legal by a private company?

FFS, laws tell you what's illegal, not what's legal!

fasttalkerchat

To stop this going round in circle.

Clamping is illegal.
For anyone that missed that debate:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79371720&postcount=745

Jesus Shaves

Anan1 wrote: »

FFS, laws tell you what's illegal, not what's legal!

Are you purposely trying to make yourself out to be a complete and utter d*ck?

Anan1

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

To stop this going round in circle.

Clamping is illegal.
For anyone that missed that debate:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79371720&postcount=745

That doesn't show that clamping is illegal. Like many others, you're conveniently ignoring without lawful authority or reasonable cause.

fasttalkerchat

Anan1 wrote: »

That doesn't show that clamping is illegal. Like many others, you're conveniently ignoring without lawful authority or reasonable cause.

No reasonable cause. Lawful authority was a grey area until a judge ruled against it. The full case is up a few pages back. I'm away out.

Bruthal

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

No reasonable cause. Lawful authority was a grey area until a judge ruled against it. The full case is up a few pages back. I'm away out.

Dont forget to bring some change.

Drummerboy08

Nice to see we've come full circle today. :rolleyes:

Wexfordian

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

No reasonable cause. Lawful authority was a grey area until a judge ruled against it. The full case is up a few pages back. I'm away out.

Afraid not. It was thrown out in that specific case. WIT continued clamping thereafter without any issues. I think WITSU challenged a couple more cases but lost them. (My only connection to this btw was being on the staff of WITSU a good bit before this, so I tend to notice articles relating to it out of curiosity).

The actual objection to clamping under the law isn't so much the RTA section quoted, but an anomaly in Irish law (its outlined at length in the article that both myself and Stark have linked to). In most countries, a notice stating the terms and conditions of parking and stating that by parking you are agreeing to them is sufficient to create a contract. In Ireland it can be argued that this isn't the case, but its not clear as to how much it can be applied to clamping.

If the signs are sufficient notice, then there is probably "reasonable cause" and S113 is not relevant, if they aren't then S113 is relevant. Either way S113 is not an anti-clamping magical bullet....

Anan1

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

Nice to see we've come full circle today. :rolleyes:

You've already said that you wouldn't have helped to remove the clamp if the OP had been clamped under a fair and regulated system. Can't you see that such a system wouldn't allow someone 20 minutes to go off and get change? Therefore even if the system isn't fair, what's the relevance of that in the OP's case?

Drummerboy08

Anan1 wrote: »

You've already said that you wouldn't have helped to remove the clamp if the OP had been clamped under a fair and regulated system. Can't you see that such a system wouldn't allow someone 20 minutes to go off and get change? Therefore even if the system isn't fair, what's the relevance of that in the OP's case?

Who has said the system wouldnt allow for 20 minutes?

Anan1

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

Who has said the system wouldnt allow for 20 minutes?

20 minutes is a long time. Dún Laoghaire gives 15, the idea being that you don't have to pay at all for most errands. That's the council deciding to help out local business, private car park owners will be under no obligation to give more than the time it takes to get a ticket. And in this case I don't think there was any posted grace period?

Drummerboy08

Anan1 wrote: »

20 minutes is a long time. Dún Laoghaire gives 15, the idea being that you don't have to pay at all for most errands. That's the council deciding to help out local business, private car park owners will be under no obligation to give more than the time it takes to get a ticket. And in this case I don't think there was any posted grace period?

So it's your opinion, and not that of any court or other legal body?

Grand, I'll wait to see what they say.

Anan1

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

So it's your opinion, and not that of any court or other legal body?

Grand, I'll wait to see what they say.

Bit snippy this morning, aren't we? Of course it's only my opinion, we don't yet have regulation. I don't think a 20 minute grace period is objectively reasonable, and I think the only thing stopping you from admitting it is that it would undermine your grounds for removing the clamp.

Drummerboy08

Anan1 wrote: »

Bit snippy this morning, aren't we? Of course it's only my opinion, we don't yet have regulation. I don't think a 20 minute grace period is objectively reasonable, and I think the only thing stopping you from admitting it is that it would undermine your grounds for removing the clamp.

I think twenty minutes i perfectly reasonable for a clamper not to touch a vehicle.

I have my opinion and you have your's, so until someone steps in with the legislation, I'll continue to do what I do and you can do whatever it is you do.

BUBBLE WRAP

Anan1 wrote: »

Bit snippy this morning, aren't we?

I believe you can get your opinion across without sly little comments like that. :rolleyes:

Anan1

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

I think twenty minutes i perfectly reasonable for a clamper not to touch a vehicle.

I have my opinion and you have your's, so until someone steps in with the legislation, I'll continue to do what I do and you can do whatever it is you do.

You seem to be changing your position here?

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

The figure might not be twenty minutes, it would be whatever is considered a reasonable amount of time to get money and to pay for parking. That could be 5/10/20 minutes, whatever.

Once it's there people know what the rules are and can work from there.

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

I do agree with you here, but it has to be a two way system. The other party (i.e. the driver of a car) need's to know EXACTLY what they are getting into when they park in a private carpark.

They need to know that by not paying for the parking, they are essentially agreeing to allow their vehicle to be clamped.

The OP knew from the signs that they were liable to be clamped if they didn't pay for parking. The OP knew that there was no grace period, as none was signposted. The OP seems to have been given 15 minutes grace anyway, but that wasn't enough. And yet now, even though your previous conditions have been fulfilled in this case, you want the OP to be given 20 minutes grace? What if the queue in the bank had been longer, would you then expect 30 minutes grace?

Drummerboy08

Anan1 wrote: »

You seem to be changing your position here?The OP knew from the signs that they were liable to be clamped if they didn't pay for parking. The OP knew that there was no grace period, as none was signposted. The OP seems to have been given 15 minutes grace anyway, but that wasn't enough. And yet now, even though your previous conditions have been fulfilled in this case, you want the OP to be given 20 minutes grace? What if the queue in the bank had been longer, would you then expect 30 minutes grace?

Read those posts again, you'll see I'm not changing anything. I've said that I think that 20 minutes is reasonable, but that it could be anything from 5 minutes to 20 minutes.

Don't see how I've changed positions there?

For a start, we don't know how long the OP's car was parked there before he was clamped. The process in my experience takes 10 minutes for a clamper, from discovery to fitting the clamp and taking the details. Therefore the OP would have only been there 10 minutes.

frozenfrozen

Currently taking notes on how to get 19,000 posts on boards.ie

Anan1

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

Read those posts again, you'll see I'm not changing anything. I've said that I think that 20 minutes is reasonable, but that it could be anything from 5 minutes to 20 minutes.

Don't see how I've changed positions there?

For a start, we don't know how long the OP's car was parked there before he was clamped. The process in my experience takes 10 minutes for a clamper, from discovery to fitting the clamp and taking the details. Therefore the OP would have only been there 10 minutes.

OP said way back at the start of the thread that they were just clamped, so i'm assuming they were clamped between 15 and 20 minutes after they parked. Just so we're clear, how about if they had been gone for, say 25 minutes and clamped after 22, would you have helped remove the clamp then? Or is 20 minutes the cut-off figure for you?

eringobragh

Anan1 wrote: »

OP said way back at the start of the thread that they were just clamped, so i'm assuming they were clamped between 15 and 20 minutes after they parked. Just so we're clear, how about if they had been gone for, say 25 minutes and clamped after 22, would you have helped remove the clamp then? Or is 20 minutes the cut-off figure for you?

colm_mcm

The op posted 2 and a half hours after the bank closed so let's not make any assumptions!

Drummerboy08

Anan1 wrote: »

OP said way back at the start of the thread that they were just clamped, so i'm assuming they were clamped between 15 and 20 minutes after they parked. Just so we're clear, how about if they had been gone for, say 25 minutes and clamped after 22, would you have helped remove the clamp then? Or is 20 minutes the cut-off figure for you?

Just clamped could mean anything, it's your interpretation of that that is giving you the figure of five minutes. It could be 15 minutes in my opinion.

I don't have any "cut off figure". I'm not running a business removing clamps, nor do I have any kind of rules and regulations set out! I'll help someone remove a clamp if i think that that person was clamped unfairly.

If the car was parked up for an hour (in some cases it's possible to be longer) I would still help remove a clamp if i believe the clampers acted unfairly.

fasttalkerchat

If your kid leave his bike in my garden and I have a sign up saying all bikes will be confiscated if left here we wouldn't be arguing over 20 mins. Clamping for a 2 euro parking ticket or because it took 20 mins to get one is wrong.

hondasam

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

Just clamped could mean anything, it's your interpretation of that that is giving you the figure of five minutes. It could be 15 minutes in my opinion.

I don't have any "cut off figure". I'm not running a business removing clamps, nor do I have any kind of rules and regulations set out! I'll help someone remove a clamp if i think that that person was clamped unfairly.

If the car was parked up for an hour (in some cases it's possible to be longer) I would still help remove a clamp if i believe the clampers acted unfairly.

How do you determine what is unfair? If I know there are clampers in a car park then I would not abandon my car not even for 5 minutes.

Drummerboy08

hondasam wrote: »

How do you determine what is unfair? If I know there are clampers in a car park then I would not abandon my car not even for 5 minutes.

This is the point, I can tell you what I think is unfair, and you can tell me what you think is fair, but that's all it is. Opinion.

Until someone steps up and brings in legislation to deal with private clamping, there will always be grey areas, in every case.

fasttalkerchat

hondasam wrote: »

How do you determine what is unfair? If I know there are clampers in a car park then I would not abandon my car not even for 5 minutes.

In some towns that means just not going to the shops. Mullingar town for example, you have to pay to park on the main street and in all carparks. If you don't have change on you its a long drive to an ATM then to get change if you don't leave the car unattended somewhere you have to pay.

hondasam

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

This is the point, I can tell you what I think is unfair, and you can tell me what you think is fair, but that's all it is. Opinion.

Until someone steps up and brings in legislation to deal with private clamping, there will always be grey areas, in every case.

No one likes clampers but they are necessary sometimes. There are some people who take chances and will not pay to park.
IMO if there is a sign saying clamping in operation and you leave your car then you deserve to suffer the consequences.
If you need money you get it before you leave the car.

hondasam

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

In some towns that means just not going to the shops. Mullingar town for example, you have to pay to park on the main street and in all carparks. If you don't have change on you its a long drive to an ATM then to get change if you don't leave the car unattended somewhere you have to pay.

You pay to park on main streets and car parks in most if not all towns at this stage. Can you not go to the ATM before you park?
Lots of supermarkets and petrol stations have ATM machines, this is no excuse.

Drummerboy08

hondasam wrote: »

You pay to park on main streets and car parks in most if not all towns at this stage. Can you not go to the ATM before you park?
Lots of supermarkets and petrol stations have ATM machines, this is no excuse.

The OP tried to go to an ATM in this case, but it wouldn't give him cash because of problems with his account. Therefore he had to go to the bank.

Bruthal

frozenfrozen wrote: »

Currently taking notes on how to get 19,000 posts on boards.ie

frozenfrozen
Registered User


Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 615
Adverts | Friends

One way would be to post another 18,385 times.

eth0

I think there should be a national "do not clamp" register. Anyone who is against clamping can sign up to it and if they park in the wrong spot they only get a fine instead

All those submissive folk who prefer a more invasive approach to their wrongdoing can stay off the register and get clamped.

OldmanMondeo

eth0 wrote: »

All those submissive folk who prefer a more invasive approach to their wrongdoing can stay off the register and get clamped.

Won't work. Private companies are not allowed get personal details from cr reg's, Data protection.

Yawns

Imo if it's a parking place for shop fronts you should be given a grace period of 30 mins. This would allow people who are there to go to the shops in the area a chance to buy what they need without having to worry about getting clamped. If they are over 30 minutes then work away. This stops park and ride users.

This situation is currently in effect in Tallaght village around by Smyths, Abberley court Hotel, Kingsbury area. 30 minutes free parking with no ticket required. After that you must pay or be clamped.

http://goo.gl/maps/I0qF


I'm in favour of clamping regulations and would prefer a 30 minute grace period as it would promote people to continue to go to the local shops. Park and Ride abusers will get punished. Most clamping practices these days only push people away from local shops and into the larger retailers such as Tesco where they have free parking while you shop.

FewFew

Gonna jump in here and just say this is a heroic thread! Read it from the start up to about page 15 or so and had to stop, but, fair play to all the lads who helped out a fellow boardsie in need.

Gran Hermano

Fewcifur wrote: »

Gonna jump in here and just say this is a heroic thread! Read it from the start up to about page 15 or so and had to stop, but, fair play to all the lads who helped out a fellow boardsie in need.

I agree 100%, it is just a pity that one individual has turned it into a 90 post plus personal pro clamping crusade at this stage.

fasttalkerchat

Gran Hermano wrote: »

I agree 100%, it is just a pity that one individual has turned it into a 90 post plus personal pro clamping crusade at this stage.

The reasons why that may have happened came up during the thread... it all makes sense now!

Jesus Shaves

I was under the impression that anan1 was not allowed to post in this thread again, it's turned a legendary thread into bickering and completely ruined it