dvla clamping

crasin

Hi all,

Appoligise in advance for this post if it has been raised before had quick look but nothing came up on a search

Anyways my car was hit by a lorry so i parked it up out the back off my (privatly) rented house on a concrete car park directly behind my rear garden thinking this was classed as "off road" it has taken 2 months for 3rd party insurance company to pull there finger out and called this morning stating they wanted to come out and asses damage incurred to car.......no problem,
now tax has run sinse accident so sorn'd car thinking it was off road and did'nt worry.

This afternoon my car was clamped by dvla for no tax and being on a public highway, so tried to argue this and they were not interested whatsover

so contacted landlord to check deeds but could not confirm if he owns or not so spoke to really nice bloke at council highways department (turned out to be a senoir highways inspector) and he came to my house this evening with a plan stating that is not a highway be it public or council but it was owned by council housing department but as far as he believed not no longer maintained by them at public expense i.e any repairs would be billed i think

clamper still not interested and just wanted payment, later today a removal lorry came o remove my car so i went out to talk him and explained everything and he himself said its a grey matter and not sure whether the car should be clamped or removed so left my car where it was

So just need to know peoples opinions please asap as to whether to take this futher etc ?

many thanks in advance

crasin(craig)

Conor_3

I think you may find it's a public highway due to the ownership being with the council. The public highway doesn't just mean the roads. It continues up to the boundary of a property as my father found out when he parked his car without tax on the "drive" outside our house ( tarmacced bit of the grass area between pavement and front garden wall ) only to find that the public highway actually finished at the garden wall. Cue a fine for no road tax.

crasin

Hi thanks for the reply but the council highways senior inspector came out with the plans and left me a copy showing which parts are highways which is not and it clearly shows the area that im parked is not a highway in any form still bit confused?

many thanks

crasin

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers!

Its land that is accessible from the public highway. For example, an unlicenced driver could happily do donuts around a private field with no public access, but couldn't do the same on an empty Tescos car park.

I think that unless you get a letter from the company that runs the car park (council owned or not), you're on to a loser. Parking the vehicle on your own private property would have been fine.

You really need to ask www.pepipoo.com about this.

crasin

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers! wrote: »

Its land that is accessible from the public highway. For example, an unlicenced driver could happily do donuts around a private field with no public access, but couldn't do the same on an empty Tescos car park.

I think that unless you get a letter from the company that runs the car park (council owned or not), you're on to a loser. Parking the vehicle on your own private property would have been fine.

You really need to ask www.pepipoo.com about this.

While i agree with you to a certain extent in fairness my front garden has access to the public highway(they would have to cross a path) so is that classed as public highway? as the car park i refer to is similar they would have to cross a lowered kerb and path to access this car park and according to drawings from highways itis not a public highway yet the path next to it is?

this is becoming very frustrating as there seems to be no definitive answer!

thanks for your replys though and keep them coming!

crasin

Pew_Pew_Pew_Lasers!

I'm not an expert (pepipoo are) but nobody would have cause to drive onto your driveway - whereas many people might have cause to drive onto the council car park.

Clamping is simple extortion IMO and should be outlawed.

Wig

The ONLY criteria is that it is a "public road"
Public road is defined in the relevant act as a road maintained at public expense.
The relevant act being
Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 (c. 22)

section 29 (1)
29 Penalty for using or keeping unlicensed vehicle

(1) If a person uses, or keeps, on a public road a vehicle (not being an exempt vehicle) which is unlicensed he is guilty of an offence.

& section 62 (1)
62 Other definitions
(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires—
“public road”—
(a) in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, means a road which is repairable at the public expense, and
(b) in Scotland, has the same meaning as in the [1984 c. 54.] Roads (Scotland) Act 1984,


Inform them that they are tresspassing on your property, and if they don't remove their clamp within 7 days you will remove it yourself.

I don't know about the legality of breaking the clamp yourself, but it might make them sit up and take notice. - I would have thought it would be entirely legal, because it was a legal arguement used as the basis of the defence of some guy who removed a clamp from his car. (In a case I know of)

You should also phone up the DVLA and tell them that they (by virtue of their agents clamp) are tresspassing upon your property. When the clampers get told by the DVLA to remove the clamp they will move quicker.

Also don't forget to add weight to your arguement by giving the name of the councill officer who told you it was not maintained at public expense.

crasin

Wig wrote: »

The ONLY criteria is that it is a "public road"
Public road is defined in the relevant act as a road maintained at public expense.
The relevant act being
Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 (c. 22)

section 29 (1)
29 Penalty for using or keeping unlicensed vehicle

(1) If a person uses, or keeps, on a public road a vehicle (not being an exempt vehicle) which is unlicensed he is guilty of an offence.

& section 62 (1)
62 Other definitions
(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires—
“public road”—
(a) in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, means a road which is repairable at the public expense, and
(b) in Scotland, has the same meaning as in the [1984 c. 54.] Roads (Scotland) Act 1984,


Inform them that they are tresspassing on your property, and if they don't remove their clamp within 7 days you will remove it yourself.

I don't know about the legality of breaking the clamp yourself, but it might make them sit up and take notice. - I would have thought it would be entirely legal, because it was a legal arguement used as the basis of the defence of some guy who removed a clamp from his car. (In a case I know of)

You should also phone up the DVLA and tell them that they (by virtue of their agents clamp) are tresspassing upon your property. When the clampers get told by the DVLA to remove the clamp they will move quicker.

Also don't forget to add weight to your arguement by giving the name of the councill officer who told you it was not maintained at public expense.

Thanks for your reply idid what you say above already and they still argued


Just an update they have agreed that the car should not been clamped after numerous arguments and now are not rushing to remove the clamp apperntly not in the area so am i within my rights to remove this myself?

many thanks

crasin

Wig

As the vehicle isn't going anywhere, (damaged and subject to an insurance claim), you are probably wondering about using an angle grinder to remove the clamp just to give you the pleasure of handing them their clamp in bits when they do finally turn up to collect their clamp.

I agree it would be a fitting end to the saga. but maybe it is best to forget about it.

To answer your question, would it be lawful?

IMHO, I for one do not know, I also do not know of any case law which has decided the matter one way or the other. However, there is the case of Lloyd Vs Director of Public Prosecutions which argued that Lloyd was in his right to remove the clamp as he had not consented to it's fitting and it was therefore a tresspass.

The law cited was
s. 1(1) of the Criminal Damage Act, 1971. That section reads:
"A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an offence."

It was held......... that as Mr Lloyd had parked his car in a carpark with plenty of warning signs about clamping unauthorised vehicles, he could not therefore logically offer the defense that he had not consented to the clamping...... therefore really the issue of "lawful excuse" (had he be found to NOT have consented) was not decided upon. However, one of the judges had this to say on the subject....
"In my judgment, the suggestion that there was a lawful excuse for his action is wholly untenable. At the worst what he had suffered was a civil wrong. The remedy for such wrongs is available in the civil courts. That is what they are there for. Self-help involving the use of force can only be contemplated where there is no reasonable alternative."

Which suggests that this judge even if it was held that he had not consented would have still found Lloyd guilty of criminal damage because there was a reasonable alternative. In your case, you have no reason to want to move the car now or in the near future, therefore you must give them reasonable time to remove the clamp themselves.

crasin

Thank you wig for your information it is very helpfull and as you say it would give me great pleasure to cut it off and hand it back to them it probably is'nt worth the risk and it will need to me moved soon as they agreed a settlement today when the assessor came out and said he would want to collect asap but it was'nt untill my 3rd phone call to them that i threatened to remove it myself! then within 15 min they came and removed it. makes me sick that they threatened to tow my car and crush it but get really funny when they are threatened!

crasin