MSE News: Government to crackdown on clampers

Former_MSE_Guy

This is the discussion thread for the following MSE News Story:

"In the Queen's Speech it was announced legislation would be introduced so there is a compulsory licensing scheme for all wheel clamping businesses ..."

Read the full story:
Government to crackdown on clampers



[URL="vhttp://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/travel/2009/11/government-to-crackdown-on-clampers"][/URL]

Coupon-mad

IMHO this planned legislation is completely barking up the wrong tree and is a complete waste of public money. Private Clamping should simply be banned.

Surely we can't be too late to raise with the minister responsible (or our MPs) that this is a disgrace of a plan, bearing in mind I now know that a 'consultation' was carried out a few months ago which did not look at all angles. E.g. I believe they did not consider banning Private Clamping as is the situation in Scotland.

There is no place for Private Clampers in England & Wales. Discuss!

Crabman

I wonder what the "effective and fair appeals process" will be :think:

I can only assume that if it's being called 'fair', consumers who are clamped will have the right to a double-refund (i.e. a refund of costs paid, plus a further amount in satisfaction of the inconvenience, loss, stress, travel costs incurred, etc.) in order to restore them to the situation as if the clamping had not occurred.

Hopefully the corrupt BPA (has anyone seen BPA Company Representative lately? :rotfl:) won't have anything to do with the 'appeals process'.

Was it too difficult to simply ban private clamping? The people of Scotland managed to do so without much fuss. :rolleyes:

Coblcris

Licensing is primarily a means to generate revenue for the government among other things.

anewman

I thought there already was a compulsory licensing thing going on. All clampers have to have an SIA license.

I think "effective and fair appeals process" will mean a pointless list of guidelines given to the clamping companies, that they will put on the dartboard, shredder, or recycling bin. Cannot see the Government setting up an independent body to carry out the appeals process.

usignuolo

In another post here, I give a rundown of the history of a notorious band of thugs/self styled parking management company currently known as Regional Clamping Services UK run by Lee Peacock.

Peacock used to operate as Regional Parking Services but declared himself bankrupt in February 2009 after prosecution for a number of trading standards infringements. Two months later he resurfaced as Paul Taylor and the company resurfaced as Regional Clamping Services UK and started terrorising the residents of North and West Middlesex and parts of Surrey.

In April they clamped a solicitor in Harrow who approached the SIA who confirmed the clamping was illegal. In August they were at it again and clamped someone in Hounslow who got a court judgement against them. When he sent the baliffs in they said they could not serve the notice because the site was derelict, although they claim they still operate out of it.

Once they have clamped you they demand all the fines to remove clamps must be paid in cash. What is the Inland Revenue doing about this one wonders?

And where is the SIA in all this? Several forums have reported that the company's owner Lee Peacock (whose actions have attracted the attention of BBC show Watchdog) was struck off or did not register with the SIA.

However he has since renamed himself as Paul Taylor and what do you know, there is a registration on the SIA site for Paul Taylor dating from February 2009. Could they be one and the same? It does not say much for the SIA's powers of vetting, assuming they have just let Lee Peacock back in because he has renamed himself.

Nor does it does inspire confidence that any regime the government introduces to regulate these guys will have much effect unless and until some of their activities are criminalised and the Inland Revenue goes after them.

jkdd77

I think that being effectively forced, by case law, to pay an unlawful ransom demand following an unlawful clamping represents a breach of human rights, all the more so given that cowboy clampers simply ignore CCJs.

I'd cut off the clamp on the basis that there is no remotely effective alternative. If convicted of criminal damage I'd bring a case against the UK Government to the ECHR for failure to adequately protect private property, failure to provide an effective remedy, and for maintaining case law that effectively puts cowboy clampers above the law, with full police support for their actions by way of the threat of arrest for criminal damage.

Coblcris

What is the value of the bond that licenced clampers carry ?

andy12345

Sounds like we are coming near to election time again when supposed "helpful things" are rolled out by governents...