Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Clamped at Residence
FightBack Forums > Queries > Council Tickets & Clamping and Decriminalised Notices
FFJH
Hi all. I am a new member and would like to get some opinions on my recent situation.

I purchased a flat in a block of flats in May of last year. The block has secure gated parking which I purchased an optional parking permit for over £300 on the day I obtained keys. The caretakers filled out the permit when i gave them my cheque, and put the expiry date of the permit as one year from the date I purchased i.e end of May 2008. I was under the understanding that the permit was valid for one year.

Skip forward to late Nov 2007 and I get a letter through from the management agency saying they have reviewed parking and are making changes, one of which was to reduce fee to £200 for 2008, and that they were changing clamping companies and i would need to pay the fee as they were taking over in January.

I respond with a letter saying that my permit runs out in May 2008 so I wont be paying £200 from May 2008 to end of. Management responds by saying there was a mistake in giving the initial permit and that it only runs a calender year, despite it having the May 2008 expiry date written on it. Naturally I wouldn't have paid the full price for half a year, so i respond saying its not acceptable, as far as i am concerned my permit is still valid as they have made the error and I will not be paying the £200. I am a retained on-call firefighter and use my vehicle responding to fire-call emergencies and I informed them of this in the letter, saying that it would obviously be a major issue if my car was to be immobilized.

They respond saying they took my points into consideration, and reduce the fee to £50. I accepted this and posted them a cheque. Nothing is heard back and its now gone past christmas, so i contact the management company and find out they haven't received my post. So I make an arrangement to pay the caretaker and the contact tells me verbally on the phone that the clampers won't actually be clamping in the next couple of weeks because he has to give them the go ahead and there is a few other residents yet to get permits.

About a week later I actually get to see the caretaker and give them the cheque. They tell me they will let the management company know immediately that i have paid, but the permits are now actually issued directly from the Clamping company.

So i think its all ok, post comes through on Sat 19th Jan, recorded delivery posted on 18th Jan, but just pushed through my door by postie (not signed for!) and its the new permit. So i go down to my car to put it in next to my existing permit to find my car is clamped!

The clampers called at 08:54am and I am now annoyed as I am on call 24 7 and could have had to respond. I call the number on the notice - no answer as I find out the clampers have finished their shift, and its the removals company. They say there is nothing they can do despite me explaining situation. I call the main office and she says that there is nothing she can do so i need to pay and claim it back. Meanwhile the removal company say they will be upwards of an hour to come and remove it.

I basically say that if i have to respond to a shout then your illegally interferring with a firefighter in the course of his duties (Fire and Rescue Service Act 2004) and i will have to use my car (trying not to say i'm going to cut it off in so many words).

They won't budge, as they are adamant that not having their permit window is valid reason for clamping me and that they have a picture of the windscreen.

Now the clamp was removed from my vehicle. As to who was responsible its unfortunate that no evidence can confirm any of this. Its just coincidence that as a firefighter I have access to cutting equipment.

But given that their sign says "Any vehicle parked without a valid permit will be clamped" technically did I not have a valid permit and therefore the person(s) responsible for kindly removing the clamp are not illegally interferring with it?

They have sent me a letter saying that my car was illegally parked and therefore clamped blah blah and that I need to pay the release fee and costs due to the damage to their property (no mention of proof that I even touched their property) or they will refer matter to local police and go to court.

I have responded in writing explaining the lengthy situation (sorry all!) and saying that I am not prepared to pay anything as I was parked with a valid permit (even without their permit) and naturally I know nothing about the clamp.

Thankyou if you have persisited with me so far, but does anyone have any thoughts, comments?

Thanks
leegomery16
What does your tenancy agreement say about parking? If you have a right to park in the car park then you cannot be trespassing, which is the usual reason for clamping.

The sign, as you correctly point out, merely mentions any vehicle parked without a valid permit. It is silent on whether that permit needs to be displayed or not. Your car has a valid permit, issued pursuant to a contract with the management company and not ex gratia. Hence it is arguable that there was no contractual ground for your car being clamped. The only ground that exists off the face of the sign is a vehicle parked without a permit. Your car had a permit hence no ground exists. As a matter of interpretation, a clause in a contract will always be interpreted strictly against the person seeking to rely on it, in this case the clamper.

If the clamp has been unlawfully applied to your car (and it seems it has been) then you may well have an arguable defence to any criminal proceedings for criminal damage. If that matter develops to the police then come back.

If the clamper does try to take you to court to recover their loss in a civil action then I'd suggest defending it along the normal lines (detailed throughout this forum) and the particular line detailed above. I'd also suggest a counter-claim for trespass to your goods (your car) and adding the management company as a co-defendant for breach of contract. You have a valid contract with the management company to ensure you are not clamped and they have patently failed in their end of the bargain.

As to your steps, I'd suggest you engage them in no further correspondence until you hear from a debt collection agency and/or the police. Then come back and we can see how the land lies. For God's sake don't admit you cut the clamp off!
FFJH
Leegomery,

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

My tenancy agreement doesn't give me the right to park unfortunately - there are limited number of spaces for the number of flats in the block.

The sign does go on to mention about displaying the permit (which means that as a resident if my permit became unstuck from the window i could still get clamped and pay £120 despite parking in my own block!), but the standpoint I was coming from was that I had a valid permit to park as the original permit I was issued was valid to May 2008. It would surely be up to the management company to inform the clamping company of the residents with old parking permits?

One of the other residents that was clamped on that morning had recieved no letter concerning the new company and came down to see their car clamped! So you can see how ridiculous it is if you are under the impression that you have a valid permit and park there, for them to just suddenly show up and clamp your car!

Thanks for the advice about the counter-claim, I shall look into this incase they decide to go further with it. And as for the removal of the clamp, well your guess is as good as any as to who is responsible...
His Grace
I thought lee's reply was spot-on, FFJH, and I don't disagree with any part of it.

I would like to mention one small point, which lee or someone else may wish to expand more wisely. Even allowing for the management agency's "error" with the closing date, I was fairly confident that the changed date represented a breach of the contract which it entered into with you when you took up the parking option and paid for it.

You say that you negotiated the premature renewal fee, and paid £50 instead of the greater sum the agency was asking. I just wonder whether, and to what extent, your actions might constitute an agreement that the original contract be varied or vacated early. I don't think it would necessarily be fatal to your argument, but it might deprive you of the (rather useful) Breach of Contract element.

ncmoody
QUOTE (His Grace @ Wed, 20 Feb 2008 - 03:24) *

You say that you negotiated the premature renewal fee, and paid £50 instead of the greater sum the agency was asking. I just wonder whether, and to what extent, your actions might constitute an agreement that the original contract be varied or vacated early. I don't think it would necessarily be fatal to your argument, but it might deprive you of the (rather useful) Breach of Contract element.

Wouldent that depend on what the new contract said, if the T's&C's were the same as the old one, Status Quo.

However, having been told the vehicle is used by a retained fire fighter, the clamping is a 'failure of duty of care ' on somebodies part, either the management company or the clampers, is this worth pursuing?
And if so, should it be pursued by the Fire service as an organisation not the individual?
FFJH
The contract i assume everyone is referring to would no doubt be verbal as the only written evidence i have is the actual permit.

I have already written in the letter to the clampers informing them of the legislation converning interferring with a firefighter in the course of his duties and threatened to enlist the help of the Fire Brigades Union in legal aid and advice if necessary, as their main threat in their letter to me was the expensive court costs if i decide to take it that far.
ncmoody
Is it possible to persuade the Brigade to take up the cudgels on your behalf instead of the union.
I think it would carry far more weight.

Does the legislation you are referring to make it a criminal offence "to interfere..."?
If so any way the police could be involved, say by a complaint from your Station Commander to the local divisional Superintendent.
FFJH
The brigade doesn't like to get involved with these issues unless it actually stopped me from responding to an emergency which resulted in our response being reduced.

My Sub Officer did come round to help me "assess" the situation and provide me with a lift if we had a shout, but on an unoffical capacity.

It does make it a criminal offence to interfere, but this would only come into play had I had to respond to a firecall, which as it happened I didn't receive before the clamp was kindly removed by person(s) unknown. However, this isn't something either myself or my Sub wanted to wait to happen before trying to resolve the situation as it could have obviously caused major issues.

But I think if it does go further I will take some of the great advice given here and involve the management company. The block is a key worker residence and there are 3 firefighters in total in the block, one other of which is on call, and I can see that I hope than pressure from all of us will at least make the management company think again about their change to this new company.

Incidently, one other firefighter who moved in on the same day as me and had the same issues with the new pass was only offered a reduced fee of £100 despite him having the same expiry as me, so they are already on bad terms with him.

I don't mind taking it to the courts and putting effort in. Anything to avoid paying them just for the hell of it.
ncmoody
QUOTE (FFJH @ Wed, 20 Feb 2008 - 15:21) *
The brigade doesn't like to get involved with these issues unless it actually stopped me from responding to an emergency which resulted in our response being reduced.


A uniformed disciplined service, laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

I did 14+ years colour service in the Army and I know that any of my CO's would have been the first into battle, there would have been lead flying from the DALS (Director Army Legal Services) within minutes of the clamp being fitted.
We knew how to look after our own!
Wayne Pendle
A good one for the papers me thinks. It's ironic that the very people these 'schemes' profess to be protecting, end up being the ones that get burned (no pun intended). It would be interesting to find out how much the management company is making from the clamping scheme (if at all any), you and the other residents might also consider the right to manage option where you all effectively manage you own affairs as a community. Also, depending on who/what your tenancy agreement states, there might be a consultation process that has to be followed prior to the management company being able to make such a change in the first place.
ncmoody
Just thought, my earlier post could be misconstrued.

I was thinking of the old comment about Lions lead by Donkeys.
I have the greatest respect for the Rank & File Firefighter, I have heard so many stories about the officers that I wonder how you cope, your comments seemed to reinforce that prejudice.
FFJH
No worries Ncmoody, i know exactly what you mean. I love the F&RS but they need to go back to the old days of much more discipline. If it gets any worse with the modernization we won't be able to go into fires any more due to health and safety!

Thanks for the advice Wayne, i will look into the tenacy agreement now and maybe even mention the papers to the management just to get a bit of wind up them.
whitewing
QUOTE
The sign does go on to mention about displaying the permit (which means that as a resident if my permit became unstuck from the window i could still get clamped and pay £120 despite parking in my own block!)

What's on the sign is only relevant if they can prove you read it. The terms on the permit or any paperwork that came with it are more significant.

Is the car marked as a Fire Service car, or have visible identification as such? I would assume that the issue of interfering with an emergency service vehicle would only apply if so.

QUOTE
It's ironic that the very people these 'schemes' profess to be protecting, end up being the ones that get burned (no pun intended).


The whole problem with using a third party company for parking enforcement is that its revenue stream depends entirely on them NOT solving the parking problem they were brought in to control. If they really wanted to do it in the interests of the residents, they could just get the caretaker SIA licensed and do it themselves.
FFJH
Sorry for not posting for a few days - I have been away.

As yet I have not heard anything back. I have checked my lease agreement as suggested and the only bit i can find that relates to this is as follows:

"The Leaseholder hereby covenants with the landlord and with and for the benefit of the tenants and occupiers from time to time of the other premises in the Building as follows:-

4 (2) That the leaseholder and the persons deriving the title under the leaseholder will at all times comply with such reasonable regulations as the Landlord may make from time to time relating to the putting out of refuse for removal and such other matters as the Landlord considers necessary or desirable for the purpose of securing the safety orderliness or cleanliness of the Building or the Common Parts or the comfort or conveniences of the tenants and occupiers of the Building or the efficient or economical performance by the landlord of its obligations under this lease and including (for the avoidance of doubt) regulations as to the manner of use of any car parking space or visitors car parking spaces and the nature of any vehicle which may be parked thereon."

So i guess this means they can change company as they like.

The permit came with no paperwork, just a permit and a compliments slip.

The car is a personal unmarked vehicle, but has stickers in the window stating Fire and Rescue personnel, and Firefighter on call. The issue with stopping me from carrying out my duties applies to preventing me from responding, not just the vehicle, and this was made clear to the landlord when the issue was first raised and then the clamping company when i discovered i had been clamped.

JH
The Rookie
I think the fact your in the service is of less issue than the complete incompitance of the clampers in clamping while permits were still being issue.

I would write to the management company and clampers telling them you will be issuing a claim unless they refund the money forthwith, and if they don't issue them jointly with a money claim online.

Simon
FFJH
Hi all,

Thought I would give you an update as things aren't looking good. I wrote to the clamping company explaining the whole situation and refusing to pay any monies as my car was not parked illegally.

This morning I have a claim form posted through to me from Money Claim online. The particulars of the claim are:

Vehicle Reg XXXX XXX was illegally parked at XXXXXXXX. Parking Control Management (uk) Ltd are contracted by the land owners to police parking on this site and therefore immobilibsed (their actually spelling!!) this vehicle at 08.54 hrs on the 19th January 08. The immobilisation device was subsequently removed by persons(s) unauthorised to do so. We are looking for reimbursement of losses as follows: Immobilisation device release fee £120, Compensation for criminal damagee to property £120.00, clamp, £58.75 Lock. Total losses £298.75


Any ideas before I contact my legal advise people?

Also, out if interest, the property had CCTV up at the time but no signs saying there was CCTV in operation. These have since been put up. If they wanted to use any tapes or video, are they allowed to by law as there was no sign at the time?


Thanks



Alexis
QUOTE
Vehicle Reg XXXX XXX was illegally parked at XXXXXXXX


If it was 'illegal' why are they going through the civil courts?

I am staggered by these clowns.

Someone should be in touch with you to help you defend this joke of a claim.

I fully expect this to be struck out, but the only claim they may have would be that the clamp was damaged. However, the reason why it was used, going by the background of your case and the fact you were being impeded in your fire duties means even the chance of them getting £58 is very very slim indeed.
FFJH
Well this was what I was unsure of. The brigade has a corporate membership with one of these free law advice lines. The guy wasn't really listening though and it was hard to try and get my points across.

He said that they would have to have evidential proof that it was me that damaged their property to try it under a criminal law case. As they don't, can they still try and get me to be held reponsible to damage to their property even though they have no proof it was me?

I'm no lawyer but he seemed to be saying that the criminal damage is a case for the police. If this is so does that mean they can't bring up the supposed damage to the clamp to the court?
Rob S
They still have to prove to a county court judge on the balance of probabilities that you caused the damage to their clamp and lock. If they can't prove that then they have no case. It is also interesting in the claim that they have specified that the clamp was removed by "person(s)" and have not named you. If they had sufficient evidence that you removed the clamp and damaged the lock the police would have been knocking on your door long ago. They are simply trying it on.

You have a permit which allows you to park there and you also had a valid permit displayed in your window at the time of the incident. I suspect this one will be laughed out of court.
zamzara
Personally, I would be totally upfront with the court and explain the full situation, stressing that you are a resident and had a right to park.

Also consider counterclaiming/reporting for illegal eviction and harassment.
Glacier2
County Court Judge: "How do you know the respondant damaged your clamp and lock?"
Parking Control Management (uk) Ltd in the style of Perky:"We just do!"
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2024 Invision Power Services, Inc.