Introduction of clamping in Charlesland Crescent and Wood

tp25

matt-dublin wrote: »

I'm not and have no intentions of doing so. Your posts just sound like an angry child who isn't getting his way and I've a logical argument for almost every point you've made.

Your logic does not mean: current law.

I have better things to do than explain to you: ''this is not on the books of the current law'' - for those who have head on their

neck. Don't play this game, especially with players who doesn't know the rules.

matt-dublin

tp25 wrote: »

sorry but not all of allowed voters voted. Some were busy working... Can you

stop this theatre?

What theatre? I make sure that I make time for things that re gonna affect my life or how I live.

tp25

matt-dublin wrote: »

What theatre? I make sure that I make time for things that re gonna affect my life or how I live.

You have answered all my questions in above post. Thanks for chat matt.

Annasopra

TP125 I have given you 2 infractions. One for back seat modding and one for for personal abuse. Please do not accuse a poster of trolling again. Please do not decide that you know when it is best to close the thread. Please report any posts if you feel there is trolling going on or if you feel the thread should be closed

tp25

mango salsa wrote: »

TP125 I have given you 2 infractions. One for back seat modding and one for for personal abuse. Please do not accuse a poster of trolling again. Please do not decide that you know when it is best to close the thread. Please report any posts if you feel there is trolling going on or if you feel the thread should be closed

since I see that there is significant ''lobby'' towards this illegal practice of clamping, I have made my say. Perhaps I'm not as good on posting on the internet as persons involved in this chat (incl. moderation). I reserve my right to make petty mistakes. But scaring people with new regulations which doesn't have stand in current law is rather incorrect.

I really hope that moderation can show some meaningful decision and remove unnecessary red sticker, added to my posts. As I have removed names and words which were seen by moderation as inappropriate.

If it is not possible to remove this Red sticker, that's fine, I kind of like it. It makes more visible which posts to be read.

in relation to running through the posts which I think were

mango salsa wrote: »

trolling

, sorry I don't have time for doing moderator work.

LEIN

Just going to close this for a short while.

We'll be back soon y'all.

Back open, keep cool heads people.

LEIN

tp25 wrote: »

since I see that there is significant ''lobby'' towards this illegal practice of clamping, I have made my say. Perhaps I'm not as good on posting on the internet as persons involved in this chat (incl. moderation). I reserve my right to make petty mistakes. But scaring people with new regulations which doesn't have stand in current law is rather incorrect.

I really hope that moderation can show some meaningful decision and remove unnecessary red sticker, added to my posts. As I have removed names and words which were seen by moderation as inappropriate.

If it is not possible to remove this Red sticker, that's fine, I kind of like it. It makes more visible which posts to be read.

in relation to running through the posts which I think were , sorry I don't have time for doing moderator work.

You need to have a chat with mango salsa via PM regarding this.

Also, in future please use the PM function if you have a query regarding moderation as thread posts only cause the topic to derail.

Annasopra

mango salsa wrote: »

TP125 I have given you 2 infractions. One for back seat modding and one for for personal abuse. Please do not accuse a poster of trolling again. Please do not decide that you know when it is best to close the thread. Please report any posts if you feel there is trolling going on or if you feel the thread should be closed

Upon reflection I have requested that TPs red cards will be reversed and reduced to yellow cards. I have also given Matt a yellow card.

Please do not discuss moderation on thread again. Any issues pm me

2011

Robertr wrote: »

Does not impact me as I'm in the Grove (and am fully paid up)

It may impact on you if the Grove becomes full of parked cars that are avoiding areas where clamping has been introduced.

dubsgirl

2011 wrote: »

It may impact on you if the Grove becomes full of parked cars that are avoiding areas where clamping has been introduced.

Scaremongering... Divide and conquer at its simplest...

2011

dubsgirl wrote: »

Scaremongering... Divide and conquer at its simplest...

Divide who and conquer what??

Car2318

dubsgirl wrote: »

Scaremongering... Divide and conquer at its simplest...

Actually that poster could not be more correct.

There is no clamping in Park, but when it is activated in the Crescent our section is the nearest option for carparking and could potentially become swamped on our little stretch.

Is it possible to get stats on how many have paid (say up to 2012) vs those who have not paid in the last 3 years? Could add an understanding to why clamping needed to be introduced.

matt-dublin

Car2318 wrote: »

Actually that poster could not be more correct.

There is no clamping in Park, but when it is activated in the Crescent our section is the nearest option for carparking and could potentially become swamped on our little stretch.

Is it possible to get stats on how many have paid (say up to 2012) vs those who have not paid in the last 3 years? Could add an understanding to why clamping needed to be introduced.

You would need to become a member if the board of directors for that.

There's issues with data protection I think so we can't tell anyone the stats, especially in the crescent where there's only 48 units it would be quite easy to guess who hasn't paid

Car2318

Thanks Matt
I can only presume that its a high number of unpaids and those not willing to negotiate a reasonable repayment schedule..............why else would any group of volunteers give themselves such an additional workload!

matt-dublin

Car2318 wrote: »

Thanks Matt
I can only presume that its a high number of unpaids and those not willing to negotiate a reasonable repayment schedule..............why else would any group of volunteers give themselves such an additional workload!

It's a bit tedious alright, we were in a lot of difficulty financially but this initiative seems to be helping now with owners becoming more responsive. Some still though have not made any effort at all which is unfortunate.

2011

Car2318 wrote: »

There is no clamping in Park, but when it is activated in the Crescent our section is the nearest option for carparking and could potentially become swamped on our little stretch.

+1
That exactly the point I was trying to make (in post#280)
We will see soon enough if this "scaremongering" or not.

Meanwhile the "Divide and conquer" remark remains unexplained.

dubsgirl

2011 wrote: »

Divide who and conquer what??

Divide - the residents of Charlesland, clamping area/non clamping areas

Conquer - Making out that this clamping issue is a problem for all, when in fact its not. Its only a problem for those in that area that do not pay their fees...

2011

dubsgirl wrote: »

Divide - the residents of Charlesland, clamping area/non clamping areas

Conquer - Making out that this clamping issue is a problem for all, when in fact its not. Its only a problem for those in that area that do not pay their fees...

Myself and car2318 are making the point that some people from the "clamping areas" are now likely to park in the "non clamping" areas if they have not paid fees. Judging by your posts it would seem that you disagree, can you explain why? The only alternative that some "non fee payers" will have is to park in clamping areas and get clamped.

I still can not see why expressing this view devides the residents of Charlesland or conquers anyone.

matt-dublin

2011 wrote: »

Myself and car2318 are making the point that some people from the "clamping areas" are now likely to park in the "non clamping" areas if they have not paid fees. Judging by your posts it would seem that you disagree, can you explain why? The only alternative that some "non fee payers" will have is to park in clamping areas and get clamped.

I still can not see why expressing this view devides the residents of Charlesland or conquers anyone.

I think that might happen at the outset but in the longer run it will stop as people find it a pain in the rear end having to walk so far for parking.

Robertr

matt-dublin wrote: »

@robertr actually you did sign up to a contract when you bought. Most of the properties in charlesland are leaseholds with entitlements. Entitlements which must be funded and maintained by fees. If you don't pay them you lose access to the common areas, parking and bins.

I know I signed a contract but I doubt very much that it states anywhere that I will lose my parking privileges if I don't pay my management fees. You might as well say that I lose my right to live in my house. I'm not disputing the need for management fees or the need to pay them, but that does not entitle the management company to implement whatever they want to get the fees from those who have not paid.

matt-dublin

Robertr wrote: »

I know I signed a contract but I doubt very much that it states anywhere that I will lose my parking privileges if I don't pay my management fees. You might as well say that I lose my right to live in my house. I'm not disputing the need for management fees or the need to pay them, but that does not entitle the management company to implement whatever they want to get the fees from those who have not paid.

It's not a decision solely made by a company though, it was ratified at an AGM where those who attended voted in favour of it.

The leasehold contracts had something in them about abiding by the management rules etc etc etc and this would be one of the rules which can be added/removed/changed at agm with popular vote

Robertr

matt-dublin wrote: »

It's not a decision solely made by a company though, it was ratified at an AGM where those who attended voted in favour of it.

The leasehold contracts had something in them about abiding by the management rules etc etc etc and this would be one of the rules which can be added/removed/changed at agm with popular vote

I doubt very much that you can just add whatever you want to the rules just by having a vote. There are going to be limits. Did you get legal counsel on this before determining if you could do this?

tp25

Robertr wrote: »

I doubt very much that you can just add whatever you want to the rules just by having a vote. There are going to be limits. Did you get legal counsel on this before determining if you could do this?

one would say the legal advise was taken, or is as .... another one would say his

point, there is enough room for the landmark cases in this country.

In many cases such bunch of votes is a collection pot not to fund the

maintenance of the estate but to get the attorney paid for own mistakes.

matt-dublin

Robertr wrote: »

I doubt very much that you can just add whatever you want to the rules just by having a vote. There are going to be limits. Did you get legal counsel on this before determining if you could do this?

The management agent has an in house lawyer

conlof

I welcome the clamping. I am up to date with me fees.
I feel sure that if everyone was up to date also the fees would reduce over time.
Well done to Matt-Dublin for taking an interest in the community.
Imo the arguments against the clamping all stem from a wish to not have to pay the fees.
I personally know residents who have paid no fees since they moved in(6 years ago). These guys are totally against clamping and gobbing off about angle grinders and the rights of property. Freeloaders.
Clamp, clamp and clamp some more.

tp25

with such approach clamping lobby will be getting stronger. Until this affect you personally, you can keep saying that you are right. Some day some of you may feel, oops. I did too much. This approach really supports healthcare system in our EU part of europe... keep stressing and get overstressed, get ill, get hospitalized. and finally get your lesson. But I gamble, none of the lobby board or it's members would agree to that.
Hence the members will have another reason for ''chat''... so popular task for some. Time to cut the grass, sun is shining.

conlof wrote: »

(6 years ago). Freeloaders.

I personally have been carefully looking what was done in the estate in the past 8 years.
How many times the gutters were cleaned, how many times the wooden frames of the windows were painted (1), the grass gets cut (fairplay, I do that too), some people seems to fight about their stools, they know it's good to be on the sinking fund payroll.

matt-dublin

It's funny because all the the apartment blocks in town and dundrum have clamping in operation and they don't seem to have issues......

I don't think we will either

tp25

Suggest to board of directors, disclose to residents the full T&C's of the agreement with clampers and all attached letters and NDA's for the full transparency of the terms and what way monies are changing hands (sorry bank accounts).

Above poster seems to be very engaged in publicizing these events, sadly he stated he does so voluntarily (or I'm wrong), I wonder if all

residents will benefit from the clampers and get our gutters cleaned.

matt-dublin wrote: »

I don't think we will either

of course, why should one do something, it takes an effort to do something.

... which isn't very popular for many.

Unfortunately not too many will benefit from clampers, but what's more sad that not too many will do anything about it either.

youknowwho

matt-dublin wrote: »

The management agent has an in house lawyer

I'd be surprised if Kennedy Wright have an inhouse lawyer - I say that only from my dealings with them and I'm open to correction.


The management company can do whatever the members vote on, providing it comes within the powers vested in the company in its Memo and Articles (its constitution). The members have voted for this rule change (in our case) and so it is being implemented.

However I understand that the original solicitors are steadily pushing through the handover of the common areas to the council - that being the common areas within the estates and not the spine road. There seems to be a need to do so as properties are starting to change hands again and the initial loose ends need tying up. When that occurs you will be in serious difficulty clamping vehicles - may as well clamp any car on the mainstreet belonging to a debtor!

tp25

It seems that someone jumped onto the train without knowing where it's heading to. Clamping in Dublin is a whole different type of issue.