Car clamped in own space!!

angel_islington

chrisspectre wrote: »

Through my vast study of the clamping/towing/ticketting industry i feel i can answer this question more adequately than others.

Unfortunately, the rest of your post does not back up this statement. I would suggest that you go back and study some more. No 'A' grades here!

angel_islington

chrisspectre wrote: »

Through my vast study of the clamping/towing/ticketting industry i feel i can answer this question more adequately than others.
When a landowner or person acting with the authority of a landowner contracts a ppc to regulate parking, they do so on condition that the terms and conditions are adhered to.
The parking permit that 'slipped' would have been one issued by the same company who clamped her vehicle. She would have been aware of the terms and conditions of having a permit.
In most cases the terms will state that the permit is only valid when clearly on display. i.e. a permit in your pocket does not authorise you to park there.
Although the consequence is harsh, the residents should understand that displaying a permit is the only way a clamper/tow-er can know if a vehcile is supposed to be there or not.
As the majority (if not, all) clampers/tow-ers are sub-contractors, they will demand a fee from the company they work on behalf of if they have done their job correctly, likewise the tow company will still demand it's call out fee.
When the resident was at fault through carelessness or accident, the ppc would have incurred costs and it is fair for them to expect the resident to pay.
Also, the same resident enjoys the services the contractor provides, for example if she came home and had nowhere to park because of wrongly parked vehicles, she would want to know what to do about it.
If the contractor were to bear the costs and waiver the fee, it would cause other residents to be less attentive to ensuring their own permits were displayed.

OP, you can safely ignore this post. Not ONE word is valid.

chrisspectre

swimsink wrote: »

I could be completely off the mark but i thought private clamping was no longer allowed?

It's still not be passed by parliament.

chrisspectre

angel_islington wrote: »

OP, you can safely ignore this post. Not ONE word is valid.

I'm afraid you are most likely wrong and show a lack of knowledge of how the clamping/towing business works. If the resident has been given a permit the landowner or person with authority to act as landowner would have had to have given the ppc permission to operate there.
The residents would have had to have agreed to the land being regulated by the company and the mere fact that she has in the past used the permit shows agreement.

You see my problem with these forums is not that they try to help the so called 'victim' but that the advice given here is ignorant of how things work. This can lead to unnecessary complications.
If you are going to act so authoritatively then at least get a bit of knowledge under your belt.

chrisspectre

jkdd77 wrote: »

It's too late now, but under all the circumstances you would almost certainlly have had a "lawful excuse" for cutting off the trespassing clamp, and any civil claim would also most likely have failed (and you could have counterclaimed for the trespass against your vehicle). If there is a "next time", consider this option.

Not if the permit was issued by the clamping company and the conditions for it's use are on display or known to the resident.

angel_islington

chrisspectre wrote: »

I'm afraid you are most likely wrong and show a lack of knowledge of how the clamping/towing business works. If the resident has been given a permit the landowner or person with authority to act as landowner would have had to have given the ppc permission to operate there.
The residents would have had to have agreed to the land being regulated by the company and the mere fact that she has in the past used the permit shows agreement.

You see my problem with these forums is not that they try to help the so called 'victim' but that the advice given here is ignorant of how things work. This can lead to unnecessary complications.
If you are going to act so authoritatively then at least get a bit of knowledge under your belt.

I speak with authority because I know I am right. It's a real confidence booster.

The landowner is perfectly entitled to give a PPC permission to operate on their land. The PPC then has to follow the laws of the land. Which are very different to the laws of the PPC's. The latter are just made up and hold no authority whatsoever.

The very fact that you are here, on this forum, shows that the PPC's are getting desperate. They know full well that people are wising up to their little scams and are making one last stand before it's no longer viable to try to rip people off and move onto the next easy money making exercise. Hopefully, that won't be too much longer.

Driver8

chrisspectre wrote: »

It's still not be passed by parliament.

You are illiterate.

angel_islington

chrisspectre wrote: »

You see my problem with these forums is not that they try to help the so called 'victim' but that the advice given here is ignorant of how things work.

Your problem with these forums is that they are going to put your companies out of business.

chrisspectre

angel_islington wrote: »

I speak with authority because I know I am right. It's a real confidence booster.

The landowner is perfectly entitled to give a PPC permission to operate on their land. The PPC then has to follow the laws of the land. Which are very different to the laws of the PPC's. The latter are just made up and hold no authority whatsoever.

The very fact that you are here, on this forum, shows that the PPC's are getting desperate. They know full well that people are wising up to their little scams and are making one last stand before it's no longer viable to try to rip people off and move onto the next easy money making exercise. Hopefully, that won't be too much longer.

It would be a condition of contract that parking permits issued would be correctly displayed. Instead of arguing with me, why don't you just ask the original poster to check if the permit was issued by the same company who clamped her, and if the conditions say the permit must be on display?
As for your other comments, i am on this forum for fun. I am seriously bored and i cringe every time i see bad advice.
Would you rather this forum only gave a one sided arguement or is it against your rules to balance it out?
Also, i still haven't stated who i am or what i do, and you're all still trying to guess. I can assure you my work is far removed from the ppc business, but i do have a much deeper knowledge of it than most. Still think i'm perky do you?

Driver8

chrisspectre wrote: »

It would be a condition of contract that parking permits issued would be correctly displayed. Instead of arguing with me, why don't you just ask the original poster to check if the permit was issued by the same company who clamped her, and if the conditions say the permit must be on display?
As for your other comments, i am on this forum for fun. I am seriously bored and i cringe every time i see bad advice.
Would you rather this forum only gave a one sided arguement or is it against your rules to balance it out?
Also, i still haven't stated who i am or what i do, and you're all still trying to guess. I can assure you my work is far removed from the ppc business, but i do have a much deeper knowledge of it than most. Still think i'm perky do you?

You know nothing.

But you are illiterate.