MSE News: Wheel clamping to be banned on private land

bigturnip

TheBogsDollocks wrote: »

A knee height wall or fence around the perimeter of a car park with a gap wide enough for vehicles to pass but with access controlled by a bollard or barrier arm is not an expensive solution and will not require much maintenence. A wall would not even need be continuous but just brick pillars every 2m (so a vehcile cannot pass between) to reduce costs. Solutions are out there.

http://www.barriersdirect.co.uk/

Some car parks are far too small for that, when we are talking about a couple of spaces outside a shop it's a complete non-starter.

bigturnip

peter_the_piper wrote: »

Thanks for the compliment. Its not such a stupid example, its often reported on pepipoo and others. Hopefully the government will put things in place to help the sensibible landowner and prevent excesses on both sides. As has been said many times it works north of the border so if they look there for how its done as well as getting the council to step in (as has already been suggested) then all should be well.

It is, it's like saying we should ban alcohol because of all the violent crime associated to it, just because some landowners allow this to happen, doesn't mean that the majority of landowners, who go to great pains to ensure that their limited parking is available for their customers, should suffer.

lucylucky

bigturnip wrote: »

Some car parks are far too small for that, when we are talking about a couple of spaces outside a shop it's a complete non-starter.

And so an alternative will need to be thought of

lucylucky

bigturnip wrote: »

It is, it's like saying we should ban alcohol because of all the violent crime associated to it, just because some landowners allow this to happen, doesn't mean that the majority of landowners, who go to great pains to ensure that their limited parking is available for their customers, should suffer.

You said it was a stupid example I showed that it was not.

It is not like banning alcohol in any sense at all.

Clamping in England & Wales will be banned, as it is in Scotland, now move on and seek solutions to problems that you think might exist.

bigturnip

lucylucky wrote: »

You said it was a stupid example I showed that it was not.

How exactly did you show this? I maintain that it's a stupid argument, because it has nothing to do with deterring unauthorised cars and everything to do with over zealous clamping firms and the landowners who let them get away with it.

lucylucky wrote: »

It is not like banning alcohol in any sense at all.

Of course it is, it's penalising the responsible for the indiscretions of the irresponsible.

lucylucky wrote: »

Clamping in England & Wales will be banned, as it is in Scotland, now move on and seek solutions to problems that you think might exist.

If it gets through the commons and the lords then it will be, which is precisely why I am seeking a solution to the problem.

bigturnip

lucylucky wrote: »

And so an alternative will need to be thought of

Exactly what I've been trying to do.

Coupon-mad

Personally I think what really is a stupid argument is to try to suggest for one minute that there are any clamping companies out there at all who actually want to 'deter unauthorised cars'. :rotfl:

That would be the very LAST thing any clamping company would have ever wanted to achieve, their gravy train on that site would have come off the rails before they could have made their first million. That would never do, even for those mythical 'less evil clampers' who some posters would have us believe even had a genuine appeals process (for that was part of the BPA Code of Conduct wasn't it?).

But now the crims have ended the whole protection racket for them and for the 'lesser crims' in the industry, if there ever were any. Face up to the fact that the scam has been sussed at long last - you cannot regulate unlawful activity. There was no excuse, it WAS taking the law into their own hands which was untenable.

The most shocking thing - apart from the behaviour of the thugs themselves - in all these years of clampers getting away with it, was the inaction of almost every Police force. How the BiB could turn up, look for a sign (any sign, with any irrelevant, illegible and non-contractual wording, behind any bush or metres high on any wall) and then say something along the lines of 'oh look, it's OK, they had a sign up somewhere so they can clamp and charge whatever they like and we will turn a blind eye to their bully-boy blackmailing tactics' was absolutely pathetic.

Clamping is dead and so is this thread.

bigturnip

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Personally I think what really is a stupid argument is to try to suggest for one minute that there are any clamping companies out there at all who actually want to 'deter unauthorised cars'. :rotfl:

When did I suggest this? It is the landowners who wan to deter unauthorised cars. All I said about clamping is that some companies are over zealous, if this is the case then it is up to the land owner to get rid of them and hire a new company.

Coupon-mad wrote: »

That would be the very LAST thing any clamping company would have ever wanted to achieve, their gravy train on that site would have come off the rails before they could have made their first million. That would never do, even for those mythical 'less evil clampers' who some posters would have us believe even had a genuine appeals process (for that was part of the BPA Code of Conduct wasn't it?).

If you actually bothered reading the thread you would see that I suggested there should be an independent appeals process paid for from the clamping licenses, you will have to ask the former Labour government who brought in the law to grant licences to the clamping firms why they omitted such a system.

Coupon-mad wrote: »

But now the crims have ended the whole protection racket for them and for the 'lesser crims' in the industry, if there ever were any. Face up to the fact that the scam has been sussed at long last - you cannot regulate unlawful activity. There was no excuse, it WAS taking the law into their own hands which was untenable.

Just because the law was badly written and certain firms don't abide by it doesn't automatically make the idea bad.

Coupon-mad wrote: »

The most shocking thing - apart from the behaviour of the thugs themselves - in all these years of clampers getting away with it, was the inaction of almost every Police force. How the BiB could turn up, look for a sign (any sign, with any irrelevant, illegible and non-contractual wording, behind any bush or metres high on any wall) and then say something along the lines of 'oh look, it's OK, they had a sign up somewhere so they can clamp and charge whatever they like and we will turn a blind eye to their bully-boy blackmailing tactics' was absolutely pathetic.

Again, just because the law is badly written and badly policed doesn't make it a bad idea, what is needed is a complete rewriting of the law to make it fairer, another point I made a long time ago in this thread.

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Clamping is dead and so is this thread.

Not yet it isn't, and this is a discussion forum, not a let's all come to the same conclusion and move on website. If you don't want to read it or discuss it then don't.

lucylucky

"Of course it is, it's penalising the responsible for the indiscretions of the irresponsible."

Responsible what?
Clampers?

You jest surely

Spartacus_Mills

lucylucky wrote: »

You said it was a stupid example I showed that it was not.

It is not like banning alcohol in any sense at all.

Clamping in England & Wales will be banned, as it is in Scotland, now move on and seek solutions to problems that you think might exist.

It was not a stupid example. It was a perfect example of how the clampers operate and why the industry is going to be banned.

We have had Police Cars and Ambulances clamped, Nurses on home visits clamped. Clamping is simply extortion. That it is being baned is something to celebrate. Scotland manage perfectly well without it.