Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
Hi everyone!. Ive just had the most expensive McDonalds breakfast ever £86.77 in fact. £6.77 for the breakfast and £80 for a clamp.
The car park was near enough empty and it was a simple mistake that i made. Basically the car park has disabled spaces and space that are both disabled and parent and toddler.
I parked in the disabled only unfortunately.
Yes i did have my little baby boy with me.
There were signs saying vehicles will be clamped etc etc But it was a genuine mistake on my behalf , by parking in disabled only.
The only way of knowing is by checking the painting sign on the floor there are no signs erected stating clearly what bay is what, and i was in a rush.
I came out of McDonalds after about 15 mins to find this great big yellow clamp on my wheel. I looked and shaked it for a while before some bloke turned up in his little white van and muttered "sorry Boss I have to clamp you and its £80 release fee"
After turning green and shakin my head i had no option than to take baby to bank with me to get the £80 and pay him.
Is there any way that this is unlawful at all and can i reclaim my money back anyway??
PS the car park was a free car park for shoppers there are about 5 shops INternationale, Instore, McDonalds , Bratano Shoes and Lidl.
And I am led to believe it is privately owned land.
Dear Bathspray
I to am a victim of national clamps I attended a funeral of a friend and parked in a carpark next to some local shops near the church this carpark has been free for several years. I was unaware that the carpark had been sold. I attended the funeral and was disgusted to find the clamp on my car on my return. The clampers told me they had been tipped off that something big was going on that day and to clamp all attending the funeral. It was brought to my notice that signs had been put up but none at the entrance to the carpark warning the drivers, the signs were out of the line of site of drivers entering the carpark to the left and to the right.My local paper has run the story and the comments of this man Whitehouse said that we were ignorant and rude to his staff I know that I never said anything rude and I was not ignorant to them either but what do they care approx 10 people were clamped and they had a nice little booty for an hours work. Had I have known that the carpark was private I would not have used it this is my first parking fine of anykind in 35 years of driving.
Boxerdog.
30th Nov 2007 I have now contacted my local newspaper and confirmed that this man Whitehouse did indeed state that I was rude and ignorant.
I have also spoken to the PC who was onsite at the time and he has said that he is prepared to make a statement to the fact I was not rude or ignorant at any time so I now intend to take this matter further and have this man say sorry in public. I hope this will help the people who are innocent victims of this companys sometimes indiscriminate clamping.
Boxerdog
National Clamps are one of the biggest in the UK.
The company is registered in the cayman islands or something like that, but office in the UK.
If the signs are there, and youve been clamped and paid your money (£80 does not seem unreasonable in clamping terms) .. youve probarly seen the last of it.
But its worth taking pics of the area (especially if you feel there are no signs/inadequate signs) and making an appeal.
Like most things, now youve paid, you're unlikely to get the money back and if you have a case on inadequate signage then you can take them to the small claims court.
If either of you paid by credit card, it is worth writing to the credit card company along the following lines:
[YOUR ADDRESS]
[YOUR PHONE NUMBER]
Dear [INSERT NAME]
Account: [INSERT YOUR ACCOUNT NUMBER]
I wish to dispute the charge made on my account on [INSERT DATE] by [INSERT COMPANY NAME AS ON YOUR STATEMENT].
The payment was made in order to release a wheel clamp from my vehicle.
The reason I wish to be reimbursed is that the representative of [NAME] demanded the money with menace and there was no legal foundation for the charge.
I pointed out to the representative of [NAME] that under The Road Traffic Act 1991 my vehicle was parked legally but he declined to remove the wheel clamp before taking payment.
The Road Traffic Act 1991 states that a vehicle can only be clamped if the parking restriction notice(s) were located within “Three Car Lengths” of the vehicle and at a “reasonable height” to allow the owner to see them.
My vehicle was parked outside of these parameters when it was clamped, making the clamping of my vehicle and the charge illegal.
I have supplied the following supporting evidence to prove my claim:
1) [NUMBER] Photographs which show that my vehicle was clearly not within the aforementioned vicinity of the parking restriction sign.
2) A copy of my original notes which show the measurements I made at the scene. These show that [DELETE AS APPLICABLE] the sign was placed illegally / I was outside the vicinity of the restriction sign that legally warrants a wheel clamp being applied.
I kindly request that you apply a refund to my account and that you inform me by writing of your decision.
You wont be the first hak. The last one I read about only had to pay for damage to the padlock.
Trading Standards wants your help
Dubious website businesses Conterfeit alcohol and cigarettes Illegal sales of alcohol, tobacco, knives & fireworks to children Cowboy builders or tradesmen Car clockers Counterfeiters Aggressive selling
Never phone or accept phonecalls from debt collection companies.
If you don't believe you can win, there is no point in getting out of bed.
_________________________ ________________ _________________________ ___________________
There were signs saying vehicles will be clamped etc etc
What is the actual wording on the signs?
The lawfulness of clamping on private land is dependent on a number of factors (see the sticky for details).
The principle behind clamping is that you consented to being clamped when you parked. That consent may be implied from adequate and understandable signage.
Furthermore, lawful clamping may only be carried out by a licensed operator, who would be subject to a number of rules and regulations.
National Clamps is one of the biggest Wheel Clamping companies in the UK.
I got clamped in a car park in Preston last week, as I parked there and didn't see the car park management sign until I came back 15 minutes later and found my car clamped.
In all fairness the fee for removing the National Clamps Wheel Clamp is £80 which is a lot less than other Clampers, although it was still annoying forking over the money
I agree with the other posts in saying that this is annoying but National Clamps aren't doing anything Illegal.
I don't know if this post is still relevant as people have been innactive for a while.
I agree with the other posts in saying that this is annoying but National Clamps aren't doing anything Illegal.
Whilst clamping is not illegal as an activity, per se, it is covered by specific legislation and statute, and there is also a body of relevant case law. See the sticky post for details.
If the law is not followed, then the clamping may well be unlawful, or may well be illegal, inasmuch as it constitutes criminal damage.
Originally Posted by CPS
The damage need not be visible or tangible if it affects the value or performance of the property. Source.
The clamping of a vehicle absolutely affects its performance.
If you are not a troll, Mr Williams, I would suggest that you back up your assertions with a little more than bluster.
Whilst clamping is not illegal as an activity, per se, it is covered by specific legislation and statute, and there is also a body of relevant case law. See the sticky post for details.
If the law is not followed, then the clamping may well be unlawful, or may well be illegal, inasmuch as it constitutes criminal damage.
The clamping of a vehicle absolutely affects its performance.
If you are not a troll, Mr Williams, I would suggest that you back up your assertions with a little more than bluster.
Clamping is not unlawful under the Criminal Damage act.
Authority on this is Lloyd v DPP [1992] and this was followed in Drake v DPP [1994].
I have to ask, why did Mr Smith-Williams revive a thread that has been dormant for nine months, to tell us in his first post what a reasonable company National Clamps are? Strange. Or, perhaps not so strange
I Left a comment on this forum as when I googled National Clamps to try and get in touch with them, this forum post came top.
The reason that a 15 minute stay resulted in a wheel clamper clamping my car was due to the fact that it was a private car park, but I did not know this when I parked there. Sad Times
Both of which are contingent on the clampers having lawful excuse.
Absent the lawful excuse, the act is one of criminal damage.
I seem to have gone to pains to make that clear in my original post, only for you to have ignored it.
Nope, especially if you study the Drake case. I quote Mr Justice Laws :
...I quite accept that ‘damage,’ whether for the purposes of the Criminal Damage Act 1971 or section 5(2) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 , may be temporary or permanent. It may be occasioned by the removal of parts of an object. Positive physical injury may not always be required; but, in my view, certainly for the purposes of section 5(3) , there must be something which as a matter of ordinary language is capable of being described as ‘damage.’ The word has no special definition; indeed, no definition within the statute. To deal with a computer disk so as to remove information from it may amount to damage. Removing part of an object so that the object as a whole will not work as intended may amount to damage. But one way or another, whatever the example one chooses, there must be some intrusion into what, in the course of argument, Mann LJ described as the ‘integrity of the object in question.’ There was no such intrusion here. There was nothing which, as matter of ordinary language, could sensibly be regarded as damage to the car. Certainly the wheel clamp was applied to it. I do not, for my part, believe that a court could properly have held that this application amounted to ‘damage.’
Thats a long quote i know, but in essense, what Laws J is saying that 'damage' means that there must be some form of intrusion into the integrity of the object. Lord Justice Mann agreed.
In all fairness the fee for removing the National Clamps Wheel Clamp is £80 which is a lot less than other Clampers, although it was still annoying forking over the money
Just because something is less than other extortionate fees, that does not exclude it from being extortionate itself.
National Clamps Unlawful????
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by bathspray
Re: National Clamps Unlawful????
