APOCA clamping outside house.

BigBobE

Came home from work yesterday to find a nice letter from yet another management company for the cul de sac / small estate saying that from the end of August clamping will be in operation run by APOCA.

They will issue permits to home who have paid all fees to management company.
Most of us haven't paid as our homes are privately owned as opposed to some which are still held by the developer (who engaged management company).
My query is where do I stand on clampers. I don't have a drive way outside my home but more a space on the road.

Excuse typos and spelling typing this on a phone

Similar situation as mine.

markpb

I presume you signed a lease when you moved in? You need to check the legal status of the parking space outside your house because it is quite likely that a) it's not assigned to you and even if it is, you have an exclusive license under lease from the management company. Since it's their land, they're (probably) legally okay to clamp you if you aren't displaying a permit.

That's assuming you have to pay the service charge, I'm not clear what you mean when you say your house is privately owned - is it freehold or leasehold? If it's the latter, you're a member of the management company and will have services charges owing.

Ray Palmer

Classic example of somebody who is ill-informed on what they agreed on purchase.

OP yes you have to pay the management fees and they can clamp you for parking on their property. By people not paying they have increased the cost shooting themselves in the foot.

djimi

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Classic example of somebody who is ill-informed on what they agreed on purchase.

OP yes you have to pay the management fees and they can clamp you for parking on their property. By people not paying they have increased the cost shooting themselves in the foot.

Classic example of an ill informed opinion there Ray. With all due respect, we have no idea what the OPs situation is, and where he stands with regard the management company or management fees.

BigBobE

I. To pay the fees as they wnot issue me with an invoice. There is absolutel. Nothing done around the estate to warrant fees. None of the street lights work, I have to cut grass, shrubs, and all the other buts and pieces about.

D3PO

BigBobE wrote: »

I. To pay the fees as they wnot issue me with an invoice. There is absolutel. Nothing done around the estate to warrant fees. None of the street lights work, I have to cut grass, shrubs, and all the other buts and pieces about.

tough luck. if you have management fees you have to pay them. If your not happy with the management agent go to your AGM and put forward a motion to change agent.

Ray Palmer

djimi wrote: »

Classic example of an ill informed opinion there Ray. With all due respect, we have no idea what the OPs situation is, and where he stands with regard the management company or management fees.

He pretty much stated it at the start and has now confirmed. There are management fees and he won't pay. The management company are well within their rights to clamp. He for some reason is surprised at this. What more do we need to know?

djimi

Ray Palmer wrote: »

He pretty much stated it at the start and has now confirmed. There are management fees and he won't pay. The management company are well within their rights to clamp. He for some reason is surprised at this. What more do we need to know?

He pretty much stated nothing at the start except saying that the homes were privately owned; you made a wild assumption without first confirming what that actually meant.

As it turns out, yes management fees must be paid irrespective of whether or not you feel they are justified. If you dont like the work that the management agent is doing then call a meeting of the management company to have it dealt with; the agent is only an external contact and can be replaced if necessary. Although if nobody is paying the fees then its hardly any surprise if the agent does nothing as they are probably not getting paid either.

Ray Palmer

djimi wrote: »

He pretty much stated nothing at the start except saying that the homes were privately owned; you made a wild assumption without first confirming what that actually meant.
.

He also stated "most of us haven't paid" and those who did pay got permits. There was nothing wildly speculative that he was not paying the fees. There is also nothing wild to say he was unaware of what he signed up for on purchasing the property considering he hasn't paid and unaware that they can be clamped.
I guess you should read what people post before you claim somebody else is making wild assumptions on pretty clear information.

djimi

Ray Palmer wrote: »

He also stated "most of us haven't paid" and those who did pay got permits. There was nothing wildly speculative that he was not paying the fees. There is also nothing wild to say he was unaware of what he signed up for on purchasing the property considering he hasn't paid and unaware that they can be clamped.
I guess you should read what people post before you claim somebody else is making wild assumptions on pretty clear information.

What he actually said was

Most of us haven't paid as our homes are privately owned

To me, that suggests that the management company do not have power over this property. The OP may well have been mixed up in what they meant (and it turns out that they were), but I dont see why you would assume that on the basis of that piece of given information.

Not that any of this is relevant now; sorry OP for derailing the thread.

Lantus

BigBob, you need to clarify your legal situation. Are you 100% the estate is run by a management company? If so then you must of received correspondance from them over the years IF you are the owner.

You can look up the CRO number and look at the past accounts to see where you are financially. You should be getting notification of AGMs and these should include detailed budgets for future years and past accounts for the previous financial year. You should find out who the directors are which you indicate may still be the developer and contact them.

Does the company use a managing agent (a private company) to run the estate on their behalf?

Generally the roads are classed as common areas which the company owns assuming that the transfer of common areas has completed. If not the developer still owns them and they (the compny) cannot clamp (unless told otherwise.)

Clamping is allowed where the lease provides such remit for the company to control parking. It comes about because people dont pay the service fee.

Task the directors as to a detailed breakdown of where the money goes and on what and where it seems odd ask more questions.

L1011

Ray Palmer wrote: »

He pretty much stated it at the start and has now confirmed. There are management fees and he won't pay. The management company are well within their rights to clamp. He for some reason is surprised at this. What more do we need to know?

Bar the fact that until the introduction of clamping legislation, clamping by a non-state operator on any land, whether private or not, is on extremely shaky ground and likely illegal. S113 of the Road Traffic Act 1961 & amendments.

Ray Palmer

MYOB wrote: »

Bar the fact that until the introduction of clamping legislation, clamping by a non-state operator on any land, whether private or not, is on extremely shaky ground and likely illegal. S113 of the Road Traffic Act 1961 & amendments.

Strange because a Gardaí car was clamped on private land and they didn't challenge the legality but you probably know better.

Aren't the clamping companies all private companies and not state operators

djimi

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Strange because a Gardaí car was clamped on private land and they didn't challenge the legality

Have you got a link to this story? (Im not doubting you; it would be a hilarious read :pac:)

L1011

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Strange because a Gardaí car was clamped on private land and they didn't challenge the legality but you probably know better.

Aren't the clamping companies all private companies and not state operators

Assuming a Guard knows every intricacy of the law is a very bad assumption to make; and I also find that quite hard to believe - can you provide some evidence of this happening?

DSPS, Apcoa on Irish Rail land, etc, are authorised in accordance with the law. Apcoa/NCPS/whoever in a private housing estate, supermarket carpark, office, etc are not. And every single one of them will remove a clamp when threatened with prosecution, oddly enough.

They can come after you, civilly, for the fine but the clamping itself is likely criminal interference. Not one clamping firm is willing to be the one who defends it in court and loses.

Lantus

another quick point. Is this a gated development? Or has the local coco taken the estate in charge? even a managed development gets taken in charge quite often for the street lights, roads and sewers. Once the roads are taken in charge they become public and only the state can clamp.

If the transfer of common areas has not yet completed I dont believe the OMC can clamp either as the developer will hold title. i.e. the OMC are clamping on land which they do not own. The fact that the developer is the director of the OMC is irrelevant. They are two seperate companies.

athtrasna

OP, just because you own your house, it does not mean you don't have to pay management fees. You need to read your lease/deeds and chances are you committed to paying fees at purchase. We are a mixed development and all units pay fees including houses.

It sounds like clamping is being brought in as a last resort to collect fees. If you'd paid in the first place, and others too, this would not have been necessary

the_syco

BigBobE wrote: »

They will issue permits to home who have paid all fees to management company.

What claim does the management company have over your estate/cul-de-sac?

athtrasna

the_syco wrote: »

What claim does the management company have over your estate/cul-de-sac?

Most developments built in the last 15 years have management companies, even estates that only have houses. It was a condition of the planning permission which basically leaves the council off the hook for maintenance.

The management company is the legal entity comprising all owners, the OP would be a member. I think they are confusing the terminology with the management agent who is employed by the management company to administer the day to day running of the development.

L1011

athtrasna wrote: »

Most developments built in the last 15 years have management companies, even estates that only have houses. It was a condition of the planning permission which basically leaves the council off the hook for maintenance.

This is far from accurate. Some councils perhaps did this but its very far from "most"

athtrasna

MYOB wrote: »

This is far from accurate. Some councils perhaps did this but its very far from "most"

Maybe I should have said most urban...I am in Dublin and have family in Cork, Limerick, Galway & Waterford. All in managed developments