Happy New year!!

My car was clamped 3 weeks ago by Nighthawk security. - Reason 'permit not verifiable'

I am a tenant of a housing association with private car park & had a valid parking permit. Nightwark have sent a photo to the housing association which apperantly shows that the permit was covered by my tax disc.

Is this a valid reason for clamping my car?

I have refused to pay to have the car unclamped, but the council are insisting that my permit was not displayed properly and in the wrong.They are insisting that I pay otherwise my car will be clamped. Also do need my car to get around.

Could someone please advise me on what to do. Thank you

Your car has been clamped for three weeks now?

You could make an application to the court to get an injunction to compel Nighthawk to unclamp your car and in the proceedings you could claim any consequential losses you might have incurred over the last three weeks (eg cost of getting about by public transport, extra costs of having groceries delivered rather than driving to the supermarket yourself, etc) and if you are not in work and are in receipt of benefits you might be exempt from the court fees that you would otherwise have to pay (those court fees would not be cheap - around £275, I think).

Alternatively you might want to have a crack at getting the clamp off yourself without damaging it. Have a look on Youtube for some instructional videos about clamp removal and picking padlocks. Another poster recently managed to do this when he was clamped.

Hi, how long will this proceeding take, pls. I'm getting desarate & need the car for the weekend.

I'm thinking of paying, do you think it's a good idea??

If you can't manage to get the clamp off yourself (like the other poster gtahhh did) you can certainly pay under protest and then sue everyone involved [Nighthawk, the operative who actually put the clamp on your car and the housing association who instructed Nighthawk] to get your money back.

If you want to try going down the injunction route you might get an ex parte/without notice injunction very quickly [eg Monday afternoon if you prepare the papers over the weekend - ultimately it is just a matter of preparing the papers, taking them down to your local county court, paying the issue fees or producing the necessary proof to establish that you are exempt and explaining to the clerk behind the counter that you need to get in front of a judge that very same day] but:-

a) you'll have to put in a fair bit of work in drafting up a claim form, an injunction application form and a witness statement in support

b) given that you've allowed the situation to persist for three weeks the judge might not accept that there is the element of urgency as would justify dealing with matters on an ex parte/without notice basis. Hopefully the judge would direct that there should be a quick 'on notice' hearing though if he feels he cannot make the injunction ex parte. And in any event even where one is intending to rush to court to seek an ex parte injunction one should still give the other side "informal notice" - ie send them copies of the papers you propose to have issued and tell them the date and time that you will be going to court to seek the ex parte injunction in case they want to send someone along or make written representations to the court eg by email or fax.

c) if what you get is an interim injunction rather than a final one [and an injunction made at an ex parte hearing would be an interim remedy] then there is a chance that you might be ordered to make a payment into court so as to provide a security for any losses that the other side might suffer as a consequence of making the interim order if they were to then go on to defeat your claim at the final hearing.

Thank you for your advise, Wage Slave.

As I don't have the proper know hows on how to unclamp the car, I thought it may be better to pay the clamper and then try and claim it back.
Twice I've called the clampers and waited in doors for them to come and unclamp the car, & they never showed up. I am extremely agree at this point with the situation.

If they do not show up to unclamp my car this weekend, can I go ahead and send in an NBA to the housing association and the clamper on monday- giving them notice that I intend to seek an exparte injuction on wed.

Do you think this will be effective? At the moment I feel I'm in a lose lose situation here.

Also where can I find more information on exparte injuction?

Thank you

Google I would think.

Good luck and I do hope you go the injunction route as I think that will be cheaper than the amount Nighthawk will pretend you owe them, and means you are not paying them any money at all. Either way you can sue for whatever you pay out.

If you do fancy having a go at getting the clamp off yourself (which would obviously be the cheapest option), well, as I said, Youtube would be the best place to start with acquiring the necessary know-how. You could pop down to your local DIY store tomorrow and buy a similar looking padlock to practice on . . .

If you send prepared papers to Nighthawk on Monday telling them that you'll be going to court on Wednesday I suppose it is possible that they might release the car for free to avoid being dragged into court but I wouldn't want to overstate the odds of this happening.

equally the may hurry through a transfer of keeper.
these companies do that all the time- without a V5.

You're saying a random company can transfer keeper on a car which they don't even own?

How on earth?

wish I knew the exact details - but it happens all the time.
sometimes very quickly indeed when its a nice vehicle....

Flabbergasted....


So they don't even need any proof of identity (V5 ref, etc), and then the new keeper (i.e. the clampers) can then fire off a confirmation letter and I assume receive a new V5???

Wow.

ok. have had to pay for the car to be unclamped.

I want to now sue to get my money back. I intend to write an NBA this week to clampers and housing.

BTW the clamper did not leave a receipt - with his SIA number etc or it, just the credit card receipt.

Thanks

Should make suing very easy then.

Post your NBA up on here prior to sending so we can fine tune it if necessary.

The lack of receipt makes the clamping unlawful as per the Private Security Industry Act, which is legislation and requires a receipt containing clampers name, signature, location and his SIA number at the very very least. Mention this to the Management Co. You will be sueing both parties, you will hold the Management Co. 'jointly and severally liable for the actions of their agent, Sh*tehawk Security.'

Please find below my NBA. I would appreciate your comments

Notice Before Action

My car was clamped by Nightwark security at (location) on (date). The release fee charged by Nightwark security was £xxx. My was car not released despite various email requests to the housing to have it unclamped, & even when I agreed, under duress, to pay the fee. My car was clamped for a total of 20days

I am holding housing association jointly and severally liable for the actions of their agent

I believe this charge to be unlawful and demand a full repayment. I am contesting the actions of both NWS and xxx for the following reasons:

1. The parking penalty notice states 'permit not verifiable'- I dispute this. The vehicle was parked in the resident car park.

The tenancy agreement gives me legal right to use the car park as stated it in its agreement as below

'if parking bays are provided on the development of which the premises form part, the Tenant is entitled to use one of these routine parking of one private motor vehicle capable of lawful use. If any member of the Tenant's household wishes to park any other kind of vehicle, or more than one vehicle, they must obtain the Association's permission first............
..... By signing this agreement the tenant authorises the association to remove any vehicle, or object left in the parking Bays in breach of these conditions, or which reasonably appears to the officers of the Association to be abandoned or dangerous

This space is part of my tenancy right, & gives me a legal right to exclusive use of that space. Your act of clamping is therefore trespass and interfered with my right for peaceful enjoyment of my property.

2. The purpose of the contract with NWS is to ensure that there is no misuse of parking spaces by unauthorised individuals. In this case I am clearly entitled to use the space in question and there has been no loss to the landowner or other residents. Your clamping of my vehicle is at odds with the purpose of your contract.

3. I was only provided with a PDQ machine printout on payment for the clamp to be removed, & not a proper receipt. The lack of receipt makes the clamping unlawful as per the Private Security Industry Act, which is legislation and requires a receipt containing clampers name, signature, location and his SIA number at the very least.

I hereby give you formal notice that, if the full charge of *amount* is not refunded to me within 14 days, I will start proceedings in the small claims court. My claim will include the immobilisation charge, plus court costs, plus interest, plus expenses. These proceedings will be made against *ppc name* and *landowner*, who is jointly responsible for its contractor's actions.

I would make it much briefer. It should be a simple statement of three points :

1 Who owes you the sum
2 Why it's owed
3 You will take it to court if it's not resolved within days

More like

Notice Before Action

My car was clamped by Nightwark security at (location) on (date). My car was not released despite various email requests to the housing association to have it unclamped, & even after I had agreed, under duress, to pay the fee. My car was clamped for a total of 20days

1 My tenancy gives me a legal right to exclusive use of that space. The act of clamping is trespass and interfered with my right for peaceful enjoyment of my property.

2 The receipt did not carry the information that is legally required by the Private Securities Act. The clamping was therefore unlawful.

If the full charge of *amount* is not refunded to me within 14 days, I will begin legal action without further notice. My claim will include the immobilisation charge, court costs, expenses and interest.

I am holding *landowner*, jointly and severally liable for the actions of the contractor that they employed

Criminal damage if you damage it. Just get a mechanic to drop your suspension and take it off. Any decent mechanic will do this for 60 quid. If Nighhawk then wants his money he would have to take you to court and so the shoe is on the other foot, you could then go to Court and plead your case, trespass against your vehicle, loss of the use of it, stress and additional costs plus when you win he pays your fees

If you were deprived of the use of your car for 20 days why are you not also claiming other expenses? Did the lack of car cause you/your family to spend on public transport or taxis, any loss of income, etc.?

Obviously a judge wouldn't entertain over-inflated costs but if you can show any other expenses which resulted from their unlawful actions then if it's reasonable and quantifiable, I say add it in. Why should you be out of pocket?

And did you get pics of the signs, to show a judge how inadequate they probably were? What wording on the signs? If they can't manage a proper receipt I doubt they could produce a clear, well-lit and large font set of signs clearly explaining the risk and clamp release fee, and spaced regularly around the car park, including conspicuously at the entrance. I know your main points will be that your lease means you had the right to park there and they trespassed by clamping, and that they issued no lawful clamping receipt - but for a wavering judge then other aspects such as dodgy signage could clinch this for you if you do get your day in Court.

Also get the name of the firm correct, at the start of this thread you called them 'Nighthawk' presumably (NHS?!) but now it's posted as 'Nightwark' (NWS). Do you have a proper address for them rather than a PO Box which will just bounce back undelievered, no doubt? If not then other posters here may be able to do some digging for an address.

Thanks you so much for all your advice. I will be sending off my NBA today.

This is the address I found for Nightwark

Night Hawk Security
PO BOX 19642
London
SE20 7EU
United Kingdom.

It is a POBox address, so it seems like it this will bounce back. Please does anyone have a proper address for them. Thanks

It's essential to identify the company correctly and many OPs are careless about this.

Please provide the exact and complete name for this company including any Ltd

I have a company listed :

Nighthawk Security Ltd
1 Gill Terrace
Gill House
The Gill South
Hylton
Sunderland
SR4 0QT

It has only been in existence since April.

If the company you are dealing with is not Ltd, it is probably the trading name of an individual. This has the advantage that you can send a bailiff to his house if you're successful but he will be more difficult to track down.

If in doubt, ask the Housing Association EXACTLY who they have the contract with.

Don't send an NBA unless you can be sure you've identified the right company

Nfight, given that you paid by credit card you might well be able to demand that your credit card company do a chargeback on the basis that the supplier failed to fulfill the requirements set down in the PSIA and the regulations made thereunder such that the clamping was unlawful.

Might be the quickest/simplest option - albeit from what I've read on these forums one has to be persistent with banks and credit card companies as their first response seems to be to try to fob off their aggrieved customers with a lot of old nonsense, eg "because you entered your PIN we can't do a chargeback" (which is rubbish).

I doubt that the credit card company would willingly accept that they should compensate you for your consequential losses for the three weeks that the car stood clamped (eg/ie costs of using public transport, etc) but if these costs are minimal maybe they are not of any great concern.

I checked with the housing and they are known as Nighthawk security. I also visited their website and they do not have ltd attached to their name.

Has anyone had dealing with Nighthwark security recently. please let me know the address you used



Thanks WageSlave. I also intend to apply for chargeback from the bank. Is it better to wait till I receive the statement?

Nighthawk Security has turned up on the forums before - a far from reputable company.

It's a common trading name. Do the Housing Association have a proper address ?

The reasons to include the HA in your claim just get stronger.

Just spoke to the housing association & they've asked me to contact Nightwark direct. Please does anyone know how I can get hold of their correct address.

Thanks

The address is the least of your problems; you still don't know WHO Nighthawk are.

Didn't the Housing Association at least give you a real address and a landline number ? It's not going to look good in court when they admit that they awarded a contract to clamp residents to a company without a real name, address or phone number. The word "negligent" springs to mind.

You could try making a note of the registration numbers of any cars or vans that are used and apply to DVLA for their details. You want to include the individual clamper in the claim anyway.

Check for other threads involving this company to see if anyone turned up some names and addresses. You may end up having to use a professional tracing service.

Please clear up the full and exact name of this company. You're using Nighthawk, Nightwark and NWS

The company is called Nighthawk security.

I only have the PO Box address for Nighthawk security. Can I post the NBA to the post office box address??.

You can but it would be better if you had a physical address.

The Post Office should give you the real address that is linked to the PO Box number in their own records. As to whether the "real address" they hold is indeed the real address of whatever person or persons trade as Nighthawk Security might take some cross-checking.

I assume this is the website of the outfit that clamped you?

http://www.shadow-uk.com/nighthawksecurity/

It does rather look like English might not be the first language of the person/people behind the firm. I saw this piece of nonsense on there:-

"An opinions of existing and future clients or common public are very important for us. Please let us know what do you think about our services eventually do not hesetitate to query more information about us."

Oddly the FAQ section of the firm's website doesn't provide an answer to the question "so, exactly who the f*ck are Nighthawk Security, then?"

Is s. 4(1) of the Business Names Act 1985 still in force?

Whole Act seems to have been repealed by the Companies Act 2006.

Relevant provisions are now within Part 41, Chapter 2 of the 2006 Act:-

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/4...rt/41/chapter/2

The problem I have is that there's no way of telling if Nighthawk security is a the same as Nighthawk security ltd.

I think I'll try yhe post office route. Will they give me this information over the phone, or do I have to write in and request for it. If so, do you know who long it will take before I get the address from them.

Thanks

Good. So, it seems that Nighthawk will be caught by s. 1202 of the Companies Act 2006 and will have to provide the information if requested. I suggest the OP includes such a request in his NBA.

The Post Office may give out the information - it's up to them.

You know when you said that the HA 'asked you to contact Nighthawk direct', what did you mean? Contact them direct to get an address or 'contact them direct 'cos it's nothing to do with us'...?

You are aware that the HA ARE responsible for this as well and must be taken to Court as well? They are liable and will be the ones who will ultimately pay you or at least make sure you are paid back. Nighthawk won't.

When you re-draft your Notices Before Action make sure you don't type 'Nightwark' in error. Post the Notices up on here again first when you feel you have an address and are ready to threaten your Small Claim. You will also be well advised at that stage to seriously rattle the cage of the HA Management - to do that you need to KNOW they are jointly liable and not be fobbed off by people who say otherwise.

In this earlier thread http://forums.pepipoo.com/lofiversion/index.php/t55718.html , Gan said he believed that Nighthawk Security was a trading name of Crimeguard UK Ltd (I think on the basis that the VAT number shown on the Nighthawk receipt was also the VAT number of Crimeguard UK Ltd.

Of course, if Nighthawk Security is just a trading name of Crimeguard UK Ltd it will have committed offences by not having its proper name on its stationery or website - per Reg 6 and Reg 7 of the Companies (Trading Disclosures) Regulations 2008: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/49...20080495_en.pdf

The director of Crimeguard UK Ltd is one Mr Hakeem Junaid and he is also the director of two other companies, P4PARKING (UK) LTD and THE CLAMPING COMPANY LTD but, according to the companycheck.co.uk website both of these other companies are dormant and have no money in the bank (whereas Crimeguard was supposed to have £21,146 in the bank, albeit the company's net worth is given as a negative number, £-29,712)

See: http://company-director-check.co.uk/director/909937832

192.com seem to have an address from the electoral roll for Mr Junaid which is in Deptford, SE8

Edit: The Checksure.biz website reveals a full postcode of SE8 5RZ which, according to the Royal Mail address finder, would mean it is one of the flats within Pendennis House, Rainsborough Avenue. Looks like an unlovely block of flats on Google Streetview - maybe local authority or housing association property?

For what it is worth Mr Junaid doesn't show up as having either a frontline or non-frontline SIA licence for vehicle immobilisation. The SIA website says of non-frontline licences:-

"A non-front line licence is required for those who manage, supervise and/or employ individuals who engage in licensable activity, as long as front line activity is not carried out - this includes directors* or partners. A non-front line licence is issued in the form of a letter that also covers key holding activities.

*For the purposes of the Private Security Industry Act 2001, "director" means executive and non-executive directors, shadow directors, parent company directors and corporate entities holding a directorship."