cowboy sia registered clampers in stockport and manchester

leighwaterfield

hello peeps

we have all used the tried and tested bank charge reclaiming :j

now iam wondering if we could apply the same kick in the teeth and two finger salute to these cowboy clampers that think they're above the law

I was ripped off this week and had my works car clamped then siezed by makm security, this dodgy firm charges a £530 .00 release fee of which i now have to pay my company back out of my mere meter readers wages

The councils are charging around £75.00 for clamp removal, so howcome these leaches of society are getting away with charging these astronomical fees

could the same rules be applied as the bank charge reclaiming where we could get them into the county court asking for standard dislosure and then winning because they cant justify their costs as being fair......??????????

Also as scottish law found that this practice is nothing short of extaution and theft and is now illegal to clamp on private land in scotland.

If you fall prey to these licensed crooks you will soon find a massive bill and they dont accept credit cards, its cash or cheque only, if you cannot stump up the cash a cheque will do but these rip off merchants will hold your vehicle until funds clear, plus each day waiting for funds to clear adds £50.00 to the total payable to retrieve your car:(

peter_the_piper

This type of thing requires a more legal turn of mind so I would suggest you go to the Pepipoo web site and ask there,they have some good legal eagles who can help.

hollydays

there is a school of thought that suggests cutting the clamp off with an anglegrinder

leighwaterfield

I would have happily phoned a friend to remove it for me but was concerned about the implications as it was my works car that was siezed whilst i was inspecting gas meters at the site i was immobilized at, theres my lost half a day of work to consider to, ive also heard of the same firm clamping an a.a.patrol, i wish i had grinded through the clamp now as ive heard there has never been a report to the police of a clamper reporting a damaged or stolen clamp.

redmike123

it would be great if Martin could use this site and its posters to try to get something done about these cowboys.

I recollect that these kind of activities are illegal north of the border, so why do we allow ourselves to let this practice continue in England and Wales.

Come on Martin, start the anti clamping crusade in 2008.

peter_the_piper

Thats why I pointed you in the above direction, they have helped people get their money back from the scumbags.

leighwaterfield

thanks for that link friend was very helpfull few success stories that make fun reading there are two ways go for the clamping firm or the land owner will paste the correct legal wording on here when the pepipoo forums are back online ..... come on martin spearhead a new campaign whilst the oft are getting our bank charges back theres been sucess elsewhere now its time for some consumer revenge:money:

leighwaterfield

heres the wording for a mcol
It might help the OP if you post the particulars of claim you used so that
they can ammend and paste stright into MCOL

I sued the landlord not the PPC but it is the same approach. This is what I used on Moneyclaimonline

QUOTE

[LANDLORD] through their contractors clamped my car on [DATE] at [PLACE] for allegedly [THEIR REASON FOR CLAMPING]. Signage at [PLACE] is small,high-up, vague and ambiguous. As this is a free car park for the use of Patrons, I maintain no loss or damage has been suffered by [LANDLORD]. I wish my payment to be refunded as the company and its contractor has failed to demonstrate a legally enforceable Contract existed between myself and themselves, and thereafter that it has suffered Damage as a result of my acts i.e parking and / or omissions thereunder, and / or that I had willingly agreed to pay the Claim under the provisions of such a Contract and thereafter it could successfully demonstrate that any provision(s) under such a Contract relating to Fees upon which it is seeking to rely is not consideredto be a penalty, which is a true and accurate reflection of any Damage

UNQUOTE

I prefer going after the "organ-grinder" as it maximises the effect on the Clampers but it can be difficult to find out who the landlords are. Just change it for the Clamping company.

peter_the_piper

leighwaterfield wrote: »

heres the wording for a mcol
It might help the OP if you post the particulars of claim you used so that
they can ammend and paste stright into MCOL

I sued the landlord not the PPC but it is the same approach. This is what I used on Moneyclaimonline

QUOTE

[LANDLORD] through their contractors clamped my car on [DATE] at [PLACE] for allegedly [THEIR REASON FOR CLAMPING]. Signage at [PLACE] is small,high-up, vague and ambiguous. As this is a free car park for the use of Patrons, I maintain no loss or damage has been suffered by [LANDLORD]. I wish my payment to be refunded as the company and its contractor has failed to demonstrate a legally enforceable Contract existed between myself and themselves, and thereafter that it has suffered Damage as a result of my acts i.e parking and / or omissions thereunder, and / or that I had willingly agreed to pay the Claim under the provisions of such a Contract and thereafter it could successfully demonstrate that any provision(s) under such a Contract relating to Fees upon which it is seeking to rely is not consideredto be a penalty, which is a true and accurate reflection of any Damage

UNQUOTE

I prefer going after the "organ-grinder" as it maximises the effect on the Clampers but it can be difficult to find out who the landlords are. Just change it for the Clamping company.

Hopefully you won and got your money back.

leighwaterfield

ive not yet submitted my claim this is the wording from another succesfull:beer: case

peter_the_piper

We,unfortunately have a shopping centre with a 3 hour max stay or they clamp you. Extremely easy to go over as there is a swimming pool, 10 pin alley and quite a few major stores. Not sure if anyone has ever got their money back here for overstaying the time limit.