Distress Damage Pheasant, Cars being clamped on private land |
Distress Damage Pheasant, Cars being clamped on private land |
Thu, 10 Aug 2006 - 09:05
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 648 Joined: 24 May 2005 From: Somewhere in the "S" postal area Member No.: 3,017 |
Hi chaps,
I saked this question deep within another thread and it's not been answered. So here, I'm specifically going to clarify and isolate my question. A car has been clamped, apparently legally according to the land owner's agent, and they say they're holding it (clamped) under antiquated "Distress Damage Pheasant" legislation wanting money to unclamp the car from being held clamped on the private property where it was left parked. Without damaging the clamp in any way but being unable to completely remove it from the car, the car is moved by its owner (or the driver on that day) very slowly off of the private land and back onto the public highway. The clamp is still attached to the car but now the car is on the public highway and no longer on the land in question. At this point
-------------------- If it's brown, got feathers, webbed feet, wings, a beak, waddles and goes quack-quack and looks like a duck:
It's probably a duck... If it seems like an extortion racket, is operated like an extrortion racket, is run by an organised gang just like an extortion racket (the police are the biggest 'gang' in the country), if it is just like reasoning with any Mafiosa racketeer where any victim's observations are cast aside in the ultimate quest for ¢a$h, then it probably is an extortion racket. Or as I like to call it State Sponsored Theft Remember you have a vote at the next local and general elections: Tell your currently elected representatives how you feel. Make sure you go and vote !!! |
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 10 Aug 2006 - 09:05
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 10 Aug 2006 - 10:22
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,783 Joined: 6 Jul 2006 Member No.: 6,518 |
private clamping on private land is legal only if
effective and resonable notice given, reasonable charge (150 has been decalred reasonable) and there is an effective process of payment and release (arthur v anker) and the clamper complies with the req of the private securities act 2001 neither of these sem to be fulfilled in this case thuis you are perfectlyright to remove the clamp - including with an angle grinder - a reasonable tort in response to their unreasonable tort - self help equally you can reclaim the money demanded but this will not be a simple process at least report them to the SIA (a toothless body) and trading standards and if they are not SIA registered the police - they may have committed a crime |
|
|
Mon, 14 Aug 2006 - 16:49
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 648 Joined: 24 May 2005 From: Somewhere in the "S" postal area Member No.: 3,017 |
Hi chaps, I saked this question deep within another thread and it's not been answered. So here, I'm specifically going to clarify and isolate my question. A car has been clamped, apparently legally according to the land owner's agent, and they say they're holding it (clamped) under antiquated "Distress Damage Pheasant" legislation wanting money to unclamp the car from being held clamped on the private property where it was left parked. Without damaging the clamp in any way but being unable to completely remove it from the car, the car is moved by its owner (or the driver on that day) very slowly off of the private land and back onto the public highway. The clamp is still attached to the car but now the car is on the public highway and no longer on the land in question. At this point
FWIW, I have proved to myself that moving a clamped car is possible. I have jacked up a car on a trolly-jack and moved it 50 feet to see whether this is possible! What I am still desparate to discover is If the clamped car can be removed (like so) from the private land and onto the public higway would the clampers then be legally bound to remove the clamp? If they refused would they be guilty of interfering with a motor vehicle on the public highway or something else? FWIW I am quite prepared to take my own car over to the Marina, leave it in the self same place (for the self same treatment, presumably) but I need to know where I might stand legally - or would this be a test case? -------------------- If it's brown, got feathers, webbed feet, wings, a beak, waddles and goes quack-quack and looks like a duck:
It's probably a duck... If it seems like an extortion racket, is operated like an extrortion racket, is run by an organised gang just like an extortion racket (the police are the biggest 'gang' in the country), if it is just like reasoning with any Mafiosa racketeer where any victim's observations are cast aside in the ultimate quest for ¢a$h, then it probably is an extortion racket. Or as I like to call it State Sponsored Theft Remember you have a vote at the next local and general elections: Tell your currently elected representatives how you feel. Make sure you go and vote !!! |
|
|
Mon, 14 Aug 2006 - 19:54
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 2,248 Joined: 12 Oct 2003 From: Hants, UK Member No.: 412 |
If the clamped car can be removed (like so) from the private land and onto the public higway [size=3]would the clampers then be legally bound to remove the clamp? No. The question is why do you think they would be? If they refused would they be guilty of interfering with a motor vehicle on the public highway or something else? Nothing that I can think of. Interfering is an offence that only applies if the person is attempting to steal the vehicle or from it. -------------------- Found anything useful? Become a BB&G!
|
|
|
Tue, 15 Aug 2006 - 00:11
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 648 Joined: 24 May 2005 From: Somewhere in the "S" postal area Member No.: 3,017 |
If the clamped car can be removed (like so) from the private land and onto the public higway [size=3]would the clampers then be legally bound to remove the clamp? No. The question is why do you think they would be? Because the clamped car would no longer be causing them any loss of the enjoyment of their land and because they effectively would knowingly have a clamp affixed to a vehicle on the public highway If they refused would they be guilty of interfering with a motor vehicle on the public highway or something else? Nothing that I can think of. Interfering is an offence that only applies if the person is attempting to steal the vehicle or from it. Are clampers who act on private land authorised to clamp vehicles which are on the public highway? OK Let me ask another question: I wantonly and viciously parked my car with one of its back wheels on a white line delimiting 2 bays at a Netto car park around a month ago. Can they come and clamp my car outside my house now? Is is parked on the public highway. If not WHY NOT ?????? -------------------- If it's brown, got feathers, webbed feet, wings, a beak, waddles and goes quack-quack and looks like a duck:
It's probably a duck... If it seems like an extortion racket, is operated like an extrortion racket, is run by an organised gang just like an extortion racket (the police are the biggest 'gang' in the country), if it is just like reasoning with any Mafiosa racketeer where any victim's observations are cast aside in the ultimate quest for ¢a$h, then it probably is an extortion racket. Or as I like to call it State Sponsored Theft Remember you have a vote at the next local and general elections: Tell your currently elected representatives how you feel. Make sure you go and vote !!! |
|
|
Tue, 15 Aug 2006 - 03:44
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Life Member Posts: 24,212 Joined: 9 Sep 2004 From: Reading Member No.: 1,624 |
Common sense suggests that there is a huge difference between lawfully clamping a vehicle on private land (regardless of whether the owner subsequently moves the vehicle onto the public highway) and clamping a vehicle which is no longer on private land which the clampers have authority to clamp on.
A more detailed response would require lengthy research into case law which, on the face of it at least, the question does not merit. -------------------- Andy
Some people think that I make them feel stupid. To be fair, they deserve most of the credit. |
|
|
Tue, 15 Aug 2006 - 07:37
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,783 Joined: 6 Jul 2006 Member No.: 6,518 |
a private person cannot clamp your vehicle except as self
help when it is on their own land clamping it on your land or the public highway would not be justified as self help as they are not suffering a loss at the time it would be a tort to goods as well as possibly a criminal offence in interefering with a vehicle clampers authorised by legislation or court can clamp on the public highway but not private land |
|
|
Tue, 15 Aug 2006 - 08:44
Post
#8
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 648 Joined: 24 May 2005 From: Somewhere in the "S" postal area Member No.: 3,017 |
Andy, if I knew where to look, I'd do the research myself. The truth is, I don't know where to look.
That said, for the cost of a trolly-jack to be kept in the car, if *I* get clamped somewhere like that in future, I will jack the car up and drag it off of the private land and onto the highway. Then I will instruct the clampers to de-clamp it, following which I will ring the police to advise them there is likely to be a breach of the peace if they don't turn up soon. Then in the absence of any other forthcoming suggestion from here, I'll ask them (the police) what offence(s) will have been committed by whom (if any). If the clamper then still subsequently refuses to remove the clamp, I would rather pay for a low-loader to take my car away clamp attached. Still, as you say, Andy. The enquiry is frivolous! I got a tremendous kick out of watching a helpless woman having forty quid extorted from her but this almost never happens to anyone, eh??? If there were 3 clampings on private land in England & Wales a year rather than 3 in every major town & city across England & Wales probably every day, I'd agree with you. And why don't I like 'this form' of car abuse? Well at least with speeding or parking on the highway one does get the benefit of a trial if one pursues matters before the penalty is levied and extracted - seems to me this is punishment without trial, and having seen it with my own eyes, I seek the legal way of "putting it up 'em!" Not just for me but for others too. This post has been edited by Barking Mad: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 - 08:46 -------------------- If it's brown, got feathers, webbed feet, wings, a beak, waddles and goes quack-quack and looks like a duck:
It's probably a duck... If it seems like an extortion racket, is operated like an extrortion racket, is run by an organised gang just like an extortion racket (the police are the biggest 'gang' in the country), if it is just like reasoning with any Mafiosa racketeer where any victim's observations are cast aside in the ultimate quest for ¢a$h, then it probably is an extortion racket. Or as I like to call it State Sponsored Theft Remember you have a vote at the next local and general elections: Tell your currently elected representatives how you feel. Make sure you go and vote !!! |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 10:57 |