Caravan has been clamped

fourmarks

unforeseen said:

As POFA defines it as a motor vehicle for the Act then it is a criminal offence to clamp it unless it is one of the organisations allowed to such as police, DVSA, council etc.
A private person/company can't so the OP is within their rights to remove it. 

Or unless you happen to own it.

As claimed, but not proved.

Section62

fourmarks said:

Section62 said:

fourmarks said:

I'm not sure its status as a motor vehicle or not is particularly relevant. It would seem to be a dispute over ownership of property and the clamp has been used, presumably, in an attempt to keep the property in situ whilst the clamper pursues his claim.

As unforeseen suggests, if the carvan has been clamped unlawfully then the OP is in a much stronger position than if the clamping had been lawful.

Personally I'd probably seek basic legal advice (e.g. via insurance LP) before attempting to remove the clamp and the caravan.

If the clamper, as he claims, owns the caravan, then he cannot possibly be committing an offence. What the truth may be I have no idea.

"If" is doing a lot of work there.

There's a difference between a claim of ownership and legal ownership.

For clarity, I didn't say the clamper was committing an offence.  And the caravan could be clamped unlawfully, without it being an offence.

None of us have enough information to work out whether the clamping is lawful or not though.

Section62

fourmarks said:

unforeseen said:

As POFA defines it as a motor vehicle for the Act then it is a criminal offence to clamp it unless it is one of the organisations allowed to such as police, DVSA, council etc.
A private person/company can't so the OP is within their rights to remove it. 

Or unless you happen to own it.

POFA Section 54 is silent on the matter of ownership.

Ditzy_Mitzy

Section62 said:

fourmarks said:

unforeseen said:

As POFA defines it as a motor vehicle for the Act then it is a criminal offence to clamp it unless it is one of the organisations allowed to such as police, DVSA, council etc.
A private person/company can't so the OP is within their rights to remove it. 

Or unless you happen to own it.

POFA Section 54 is silent on the matter of ownership.

No, it isn't.  Section 54 (1) states a person can only commit an offence by immobilizing a vehicle 'without lawful authority'.  One can assume, quite safely, that ownership of a vehicle confers lawful authority to immobilize it in the manner of the owner's choosing.  

Section62

Ditzy_Mitzy said:

Section62 said:

fourmarks said:

unforeseen said:

As POFA defines it as a motor vehicle for the Act then it is a criminal offence to clamp it unless it is one of the organisations allowed to such as police, DVSA, council etc.
A private person/company can't so the OP is within their rights to remove it. 

Or unless you happen to own it.

POFA Section 54 is silent on the matter of ownership.

No, it isn't.  Section 54 (1) states a person can only commit an offence by immobilizing a vehicle 'without lawful authority'.  One can assume, quite safely, that ownership of a vehicle confers lawful authority to immobilize it in the manner of the owner's choosing.  

We will have to agree to differ on that.

Grizebeck

Post on the parking ticket section

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/categories/parking-tickets-fines-parking

cannugec5

Are the two individuals claiming ownership in the midst of a marital/ divorce or similar other dispute? 

elsien

cannugec5 said:

Are the two individuals claiming ownership in the midst of a marital/ divorce or similar other dispute? 

This was my thought as well. Both claiming a marital asset. 

SDLT_Geek

cannugec5 said:

Are the two individuals claiming ownership in the midst of a marital/ divorce or similar other dispute? 

Close, see https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6434404/caravan-ownership#latest

fourmarks

Section62 said:

f

"If" is doing a lot of work there.

Not really, it's just doing its job like the fully trained conjunction that it is.

There's a difference between a claim of ownership and legal ownership.

On this matter we are in total agreement.

For clarity, I didn't say the clamper was committing an offence.  And the caravan could be clamped unlawfully, without it being an offence.

For clarity, no one said you did.

None of us have enough information to work out whether the clamping is lawful or not though.

Hence my second sentence - What the truth may be, I have no idea.