Scooter clamped while parked on pavement adjacent to carpark

[durian]

Yes I have checked it PEABODY TRUST owns the pavement, and basically the whole estate, and they are the PPC's client. However I am not sure if the signs apply to the pavement?

 

Hi

 

This is my first post and I would like to thank everyone in support of CAG. I believe this is the only way we consumers could strike back at unscrupulous traders/crooks.

 

I have the same concern with respect to my recent case. Sometimes, it is not clear from the sign if it's applicable to motorcycle on pavements or not. Take my case for example, in a park&display car park, would you expect to park your scooter in the parking bay and display the ticket? You'd leave it for the cars coz they need the space and you cant display a ticket on a scooter. Thus, you'd park on the pavement.

 

I've crafted a 5-point letter to argue for my case against Retail Parking Solutions Limited (operator of the Queensway carpark) based on some examples I've gathered from this site (credit goes to the individuals). I've pasted the main body of it in here and further copying I suppose is possible.

 

I would appreciate any feedback if any to improve my case further coz this Retail Parking Solutions Ltd is just a bit too much. 5 minutes after he declamped me, he got another bike parked on no parking lines (he cant even see the sign from that spot) and after that a Prius (the driver was just too ignorant of myself arguing with the clamper 5 feet away from his car).

 

Excerpt:

I have paid, under duress, for the declamping charge of £150 on that day but now demand for immediate refund of it to me at the above name and address. I DO NOT ADMIT to this illegitimate charge as:

 

i) I have parked my scooter on the pavement and not on any of the Park & Display car park slots thus not covered by the sign available for the parking area. I DID NOT see the sign as I entered the car park but used common sense to park my scooter on the pavement. The sign was shown to me by Mr Angus after he clamped my scooter with a 5 minute time span after I securely parked my scooter on the pavement adjacent to the car park. The sign clearly states “By Parking and Stopping within this car park you are required to pay & display a valid parking ticket from pay machines” thus clearly not referring to the pavement which are for pedestrians. Otherwise, the pavement should have been clearly marked as designated parking bays with clear lines for identification purposes, if it were ever to fall under the Park & Display contract. This is my understanding of the contract after reading the sign subsequent to the clamping. It’s important to point out at this juncture that in Vine v. Waltham Forest London Borough Council’s case, even if signs are prominently displayed, they have to be read and understood.

 

ii) the vehicle in question is a scooter which if I have had it parked in the empty car slot as per the contract and paid for the parking, the ticket would not hold as it would under the car windscreen. Therefore, there was no way for any scooter owner to display parking ticket urging myself to park on the pavement which was not visited by any pedestrian as the only shoplot was closed on Sunday afternoon and the area was away from the busy main streets. I had also left ample space for pedestrians to walk past without suffering any difficulty.

 

iii) With respect to the clamping of my scooter, without my permission or prior consent and under the English Law of Torts (INTERFERENCE WITH GOODS) ACT 1977 (1977 c 32), I could charge you with trespass to my goods (my scooter) under the Wrongful Interference to Goods Act 1977. In April 2000, Lord Justice Roch, Lord Justice Waller, And Lord Justice May upheld that “The act of wheel clamping a car which was unlawfully parked is a trespass to goods irrespective to the fact that the car was unlawfully parked”.

 

Even if you are able to classify the pavement as car parking with “clear markings and designation”, £150 is unreasonable for a 5 minute parking time on a pavement and is clearly conflicting

i) the “Fair Parking Fine System” you are championing on your website XXX. I must also highlight that one sign and the fact that it is not placed at the entrance, is insufficient for the whole car park and this is clearly in contravention of BPA and potentially legal guidelines.

ii) the legal perspective as this charge is illegally excessive. The money in question would be classed as liquidated damages. A liquidated damage clause will not be enforced if its purpose is to punish the wrongdoer in breach rather than to compensate the injured party. In order for a liquidated damages clause to be upheld there are conditions which must be met. The amount of damages identified must roughly approximate the damages likely to fall upon the party seeking benefit of the terms. I fail to see how it would realistically cost £150 for Mr XXX to attend my scooter or any other vehicle and apply a clamp which takes a matter of minutes. When I telephoned your office to request release of the vehicle, it took less then one minute for the clamp to be removed after the £150 was paid. I fail to see how this can have incurred costs of £150. Within 2 minutes, he has managed to clamp another motorcycle parked on a “No Parking” area much to my disbelief.

 

iii) Unfair Terms in Consumer Regulations 1999. The Unfair Terms in The Consumer Contracts Regulations (1999) states very clearly in Schedule 2 , and underlines the following - Indicative and Non-Exhaustive List of Terms which may be regarded as Unfair; and makes clear that it is unfair and thus unenforceable by law to require any consumer who fails to fulfill their obligation to pay a dis-proportionately high sum in compensation in a civil dispute over a breach of contract. This is the same law that was used in 2007 when people started to reclaim their bank charges and is still being upheld today (2008) in civil matters of parking disputes.

 

I look forward to either a response or a refund of the above amount within 7 days from this date, failing which a warning letter to raise the matter to the Small Claims Court would be issued. In your response, please indicate the employing agent whom I shall name as the co-defendant should the matter be proceeded further. Should no response be received, I intend to raise court proceedings in the Small Claims Court of Her Majesty’s Courts Service for the illegal declamping fee and relevant costs including interest as stipulated above against you without further notice.

Edited August 25, 2008 by durian
legal case, area and name&shame addition

[durian]

How can I upload a pix on this?

[durian]

to upload documents google photo bucket

its free

 

Thanks mate!

 

Here's the sign and location of my fateful incident after the scooter was removed of course (and yes, the prius was clamped after he released a bike (not visible on photo) . The scooter was parallel on the pavement right next to the closed solicitor's office. After the incident, I noted only one sign and not at the entrance.

In my view, I only understood as applicable to the car park bays not pavements (Vine). What do you think?

 

[postggj]

hi durian

the parking people will be along soon to help out.

this has realy got my goat, modern high way men

in my opinion and only mine,

what rights have they to clamp you if you are on the pavement not on the highway. penalty should be parking in marked bays

£35 pounds a day storage, get real

 

last week a women was jailed who ran a private parking firm for there dubiouse practise

[durian]

Hi, Im a newbie and this is my first new thread on this forum! I just have a sad case when I had my scooter clamped on a Sunday afternoon in Queensway despite parking it on a pavement rather than a car park bay.

The car park employs pay & display ticket system which obviously not designed for motorcycle. There was no sign whatsoever to indicate that it was a private land with severe parking restriction. I parked on the pavement right next to the closed solicitor office, with no pedestrians walking around as it was away from the busy main street. I went out to check on forex rates for about 5 minutes then came back to see my scooter clamped right on the pavement!

I had a telephone conversation with the company's representative claiming that they were rightful to clamp vehicles on pavements! I had no choice but to pay GBP150 to get my scooter released (didnt think of unbolting the front wheel at the time but could have done it).

The rest of relevant posts would be moved here from another posts by the moderator. Stay tuned...

[durian]

sea-sidelady

Sorry for that. I've started a new thread and would appreciate if you could move all the posts and replies to the below:

Scooter clamped while parked on pavement adjacent to carpark

 

I just tagged on Fei's coz I thought our case was almost similar ie arguing the validity of car parking bay related clamping warning to a motorcycle/scooter parked in the vicinity. Anyway, sorry for that Fei!

 

postggj

Indeed mate. They are really highway crooks. What Im going to do next is to visit the area again and warn other non alerted motorists about this. That should shrink their revenue for a bit at the expense of my time.

[sea-sidelady]

All posts now moved.

[postggj]

an interesting point has come up on this matter and require some imput on this.

these ppc are springing up all over the place.

industrial areas etc.

 

with ref parking on the pavement

are they able to ticket on the highway (path )

 

the lanlord does not own the higway, its the council.

we pay for the up keep out of our council tax

[durian]

I've just sent the letter today - trying hard within 10 days stipulated in the receipt (strange enough to give a very short timeframe for any representation). Keeping my fingers crossed now!

 

I know.. they could probably come back saying that they own the pavement too but simply enough, it's not within the contract.

[Rob S]

The signage only relates to the parking in the marked bays. There is nothing on it about parking on the pavement.

[durian]

Exactly rob! They are just unbelievable..

[durian]

All posts now moved.

 

Bunch of thanks for sea-sidelady!!

[raydetinu]

Could you not have got a mate with a van to come and pick scooter up and take the whole lot away, then remove clamp and return it to them later!

They can only clamp you on private land, so I would presume the pavement area, from picture is also private?

[durian]

Could you not have got a mate with a van to come and pick scooter up and take the whole lot away, then remove clamp and return it to them later!

They can only clamp you on private land, so I would presume the pavement area, from picture is also private?

 

The clamper had only one clamper and he was waiting next to my scooter for me to pay up. At the same time, 2 more potential victims just parked within the area. A m/cycle in a crossbox and a prius in a carpark.

I tried to move the scooter to the busy pavement area but he wont let me let alone to move it into a van.

 

That's the problem, there wasnt any signage to indicate which is private land. Normally, I would expect to see a clamping sign for private land. I've not seen a sign where they could clamp scooter or even bicycle on pavement area. Based on the signage, it didnt specify if the pavement was a park & display carpark. My understanding is as such that I did not enter into the parking contract.

[Rob S]

I wonder what legality he was relying on to prevent you from moving your own scooter?

[raydetinu]

I dont think he could of legally stopped you from moving it; if he did I would of called the police!

[durian]

I think he's a rather an experienced SIA licensed clamper. He just kept on holding to his clamp, not letting it go and claimed that I was moving his property too if I were to move my scooter. He also said I was being physical and he would call the police if he had too.

 

My only retort (lame), "By pulling that clamp against my scooter, you are damaging my scooter and I can sue you for that so take off your clamp!". That of course could be counter sued with any damage to the clamp.

 

Completely extortionist Londoner...

[jasmin2008]

How do you clamp a scooter?

 

I would have waited till he went home or went for a pee and then taken the scooter away.

[durian]

How do you clamp a scooter?

 

I would have waited till he went home or went for a pee and then taken the scooter away.

 

Basically stick the clamp to one side of the tire and pull the chains across the tires/disc brakes, then padlock them all up.

 

I had the same wish.... see my post on 2nd September 2008 00:39 or read the sign in post 25th August 2008, 04:32.

[SharpmanTF1]

Might be worth taking a look at this.

 

http://www.britishparking.co.uk/includes/tinymce/jscripts/tiny_mce/plugins/filemanager/files/resources/code_of_practice_part_1.pdf

 

And This

 

http://www.britishparking.co.uk/includes/tinymce/jscripts/tiny_mce/plugins/filemanager/files/resources/positionpaper08.pdf

 

Sharpman

Edited September 7, 2008 by SharpmanTF1

[Motorcycleparking dot com]

Hi Durian,

 

In answer to your question you sent to me at motorcycleparking.com I think the key issue here is whether the pavement (footway) forms part of the car park. If it does then any parking, regardless of whether it is in a marked bay or not, would require you to pay and display. If the pavement is not deemed part of the car park then Retail Parking Solutions Ltd should not be able to clamp any vehicle parked on it (that would fall under the durastiction of a Civil Enforcement Officer or a Traffic Warden and would depend upon whether you were in London or not ).

 

On the matter of you not seeing the sign and not knowing whether the pavement was part of the car park, alas this is no excuse in law.

 

My advice is to pursue Retail Parking Solutions Ltd as you are doing but in the meantime try to ascertain from a local CEO whether the pavement in question is enforceable by them, if it is then it's cut and dry that you have been wrongfully clamped.

 

I hope this is of help. Good luck with the appeal.

Will

 

P.S. Sorry about the links, I can't add them properly as I haven't posted five posts yet.

[lamma]

inadequate/unread signage has been upheld.

[Motorcycleparking dot com]

Lamma,

 

Sorry I don't understand, are you saying that the appeal has succeeded because of inadequate signage?

[lamma]

for real PCNs see Bladon – v – City of Westminster for clampers on private land inadequate signage has also been upheld.

[Motorcycleparking dot com]

Success would surely depend upon whether the sign in the photo was the only one being displayed and how visible that sign was when entering the car park. If it was the only one then I agree that it would look like a clear case of inadequate signage.