Jump to content


Section 54 of Protection of Freedoms Act and "illegal" wheel clamping


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3563 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Approx six months ago I started a thread on the forum regarding the dangers for debtors in taking "legal advice" from websites without first checking whether the "advice" is correct. The thread clearly was of great public interest given that it has been viewed over 9,500 times!!!

 

This thread was in relation to a bailiff clamping a vehicle at the debtors property and the advice given out by the websites was that the debtors could safely "take out the bolt cutters" in the (mistaken) belief that the bailiff was acting illegally.

 

The websites in question would inform debtors that if they were arrested they would not be convicted because of Section 54 of the Protection of Freedoms Act.

 

There have been further developments regarding this subject but given that the previous thread has become very long it would be better to start this new thread.

 

If anyone needs reminding, the previous thread is here:

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?394562-Protection-of-Freedoms-Act-2012-EXCLUDES-bailiffs-!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya.

 

I know John Kruse believes that clamping is not allowed for Council Tax and PCNs (or at least he did). Is that still the case, and if it is - would a clamp be removable in situations like this (without damaging it, obviously).

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a reminder: The protection of Freedoms Act 2012 received Royal Assent on 1st May 2012 and came into force on 1st October 2012 and this legislation is directed at the proprietors of private car parks.

 

In the past there was a huge amount of press coverage regarding "cowboys clampers" who would simply terrorise car owners who may have parked their cars on private land (many times on waste ground behind empty shops, supermarket car parks etc, motorway service stations etc).

 

There were even press articles where these 'cowboys' had 'clamped' a hearse on the way to a funeral and they even had the audacity to clamp an AA Roadside vehicle assisting at a breakdown.

 

Thankfully, the government BANNED the clamping of vehicles by these 'cowboy clampers' from private land under Section 54 of the Protection of Freedoms Act and it is now a criminal offence to clamp or immobilise a vehicle on private land.

 

It is important to be aware that the term "private land' does not include a debtors property or driveway!!!

 

Section 54 is very clear in that clamping of a vehicle without legal authority is a criminal offence.

 

The term 'legal authority' has been clearly addressed by the following joint Home Office and Department of Transport notice (a link of which is below which states as follow:

 

 

 

"The term “lawful authority” means where specific legislation or express powers are in force, which allow for vehicles to be legally immobilised or removed. Examples of lawful authority include where statutory powers exist such as Road Traffic Regulations which allow local authorities or the police to clamp or tow vehicles on public roads"

 

"bailiffs retain their powers to immobilise or remove vehicles"

 

"Certain statutory authorities also retain the ability to clamp and tow, such as the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) and Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA), who will continue to clamp or tow vehicles which are un-roadworthy or have not had their vehicle tax paid"

 

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...heet-part3.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, despite the legislation and huge amount of supporting evidence, there are still many websites ( which include Get out of Debt Free, TPUC, FMoTL and other websites associated with Freeman on the Land movements ) that actively encourage and mislead debtors by stating that they are legally allowed to use bolt cutters to remove wheel clamps applied to their vehicles by bailiffs.

 

This morning I had a telephone call from a police officer from West Midland Police regarding a enquiry concerning a debtor who attended a local police station on Friday to hand in a wheel clamp that had been applied to her car by a bailiff. It would seem that her father had removed the wheel clamp after seeking 'advice' from the internet.

 

Of concern was that the advice given on the web was for the debtor to deliver the wheel clamp in person to her local police station and to hand the attached document to the reception and to request that the police officer arrest the bailiff !!!

 

 

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]49286[/ATTACH]

Link to post
Share on other sites

As mentioned above, Paragraph 211 of the statutory Explanatory Notes supporting the Protection of Freedoms Act 2011 clearly provide in the final sentence the following:

 

"In addition, bailiffs have a mix of statutory and common law powers to immobilise and tow away vehicles for the purposes of enforcing debts (including those arising out of unpaid taxes and court fines)"

 

How it is possible that any websites can continue to be misleading debtors that Section 54 does not apply to bailiffs is simply beyond belief.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The footnote at the bottom of this Notice states the following:

 

"If that person admits using this device on the above-mentioned vehicle then he commits an offence and must be arrested. Section 52 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 and there is no Parliamentary intention that “bailiffs” are exempt from the law"

 

The authors of these Notices should have first read the Guidance from the Home Office and paragraph 211 of the Statutory Explanatory Notes supporting the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 to evidence that bailiffs are EXCLUDED from section 54 of the Protection of Freedoms Act.

 

Very sloppy indeed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya.

 

I know John Kruse believes that clamping is not allowed for Council Tax and PCNs (or at least he did). Is that still the case, and if it is - would a clamp be removable in situations like this (without damaging it, obviously).

 

I would also be interesting in an answer to this or perhaps a seperate thread about when bailiffs can legally clamp.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, despite the legislation and huge amount of supporting evidence, there are still many websites ( which include Get out of Debt Free, TPUC, FMoTL and other websites associated with Freeman on the Land movements ) that actively encourage and mislead debtors by stating that they are legally allowed to use bolt cutters to remove wheel clamps applied to their vehicles by bailiffs.

 

This morning I had a telephone call from a police officer from West Midland Police regarding a enquiry concerning a debtor who attended a local police station on Friday to hand in a wheel clamp that had been applied to her car by a bailiff. It would seem that her father had removed the wheel clamp after seeking 'advice' from the internet.

 

Of concern was that the advice given on the web was for the debtor to deliver the wheel clamp in person to her local police station and to hand the attached document to the reception and to request that the police officer arrest the bailiff !!!

 

 

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]49286[/ATTACH]

 

 

I think it is very important to confirm that CAG does not perpetuate the advice that other forums are providing !!

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unclebulgaria:

 

As this tread concerns Section 54 of the Protection of Freedoms Act I will keep to the subject matter and could start a new thread about clamping with other areas of enforcement.

 

When the Protection of Freedoms was in its early stages, "representations" were submitted to the government from industry sources, enforcement companies and many others to either oppose or support the new regulation. One such 'expert' representation was from John Kruse. This was 18 months before section 54 was introduced.

 

Despite his excellent submission the Home Office, the Department for Transport and the government each openly stated that bailiffs are EXCLUDED from section 54 of the Protection of Freedoms Act as they have 'legal authority'.

 

Following the introduction of Section 54 of the Protection of Freedoms Act John Kruse wrote to police forces in England & Wales to outline the Protection of Freedoms Act with regards to 'cowboy clampers'. With regards to bailiff enforcement and 'vehicle clamping' he stated in his letter the following:

 

This is a “complex and uncertain area of law”

 

and further that it is:

 

"a complicated area of legal interpretation”

 

He is utterly correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone is tempted to remove a wheel clamp by force then they should be under NO illusion that the bailiff will almost certainly return to the property and this time,....there will be no second chances. Unless the debt is paid IN FULL (and very likely by cash only) the vehicle will be taken to the pound. The fees will soar astronomically to include removal and storage fees.

 

It is very important that if a debtor is taking 'advice' from a forum as opposed to an internet site that they ask the following questions:

 

If I remove the clamp and take it as suggested to a police station could I be arrested?

 

If I remove the clamp as suggested and inform the bailiff will he return the warrant to the council?

 

If I remove the clamp as suggested will the bailiff return to my property and remove my car?

 

If the bailiff does remove my car after being notified that I have removed the clamp will the bailiff fees increase?

 

and lastly:

 

After removing the clamp from my car will it be safe to leave the car outside of my home/or on the street without fear of it being seized by the bailiff?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Answers to tomtubby's quiz for debtors

 

If I remove the clamp and take it as suggested to a police station could I be arrested? Quite Possibly for Criminal Damage

 

If I remove the clamp as suggested and inform the bailifflink3.gif will he return the warrant to the council? NO

 

If I remove the clamp as suggested will the bailifflink3.gif return to my property and remove my car? Most Probably

If the bailiff does remove my car after being notified that I have removed the clamp will the bailiff fees increase? Most Definitely

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

But these websites are saying that the bailiff has acted unlawfully in the way their car was

clamped and as such the bailiff will not be able to

involve the Police for example since that would reveal the bailiffs' own unlawful behaviour.

 

But I do think that it would be entirely justified for an owner to remove a clamp himself when a bailiff had clamped the car in error but was now

stalling prior to removing the clamp.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But these websites are saying that the bailiff has acted unlawfully in the way their car was

clamped and as such the bailiff will not be able to

involve the Police for example since that would reveal the bailiffs' own unlawful behaviour.

 

But I do think that it would be entirely justified for an owner to remove a clamp himself when a bailiff had clamped the car in error but was now

stalling prior to removing the clamp.

If I were the debtors neighbour or total randomer, and the bailiff played silly beggars I would be waving an angle grinder at him along with my documents, and a camcorder. After April they will be more likely to clamp and remove any motor on the back of the interpleaders being introduced whether proof is shown or not.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

As many visitors will know, when answering enquiries I will try wherever possible to provide a detailed response and rarely resort to directing the debtor to relevant legislation. Quoting legislation is a simple matter of cutting and pasting from a government website. That is the easy part. The hard part is actually understanding what the legislation actually means.

 

In this respect, I am lost for words to see that websites (such as those outlined above) are still continuing to wrongly advise debtors that clamping of a vehicle on private land (such as the debtors driveway) is a criminal offence under section 54 of the Protection of Freedom Act 2012. This is despite the fact that the Protection of Freedoms Act received Royal Assent over 2 years ago (May 2012) !!!!

 

If anyone needs reminding, please read section 211 of the following Explanatory Note supporting the Protection of Freedoms Act that was prepared by the Home Office in order to assist readers to understand the Act.

 

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/9/notes

Link to post
Share on other sites

For ease of reference section 211 of the Home Office Explanatory Note states as follows:

 

 

Section 54: Offence of immobilising etc. vehicles

211.

 

Subsection (1) makes it a criminal offence to immobilise a motor vehicle by attaching to the vehicle, or to a part of the vehicle, an immobilising device (typically a wheel clamp), or to move (for example, by towing away) or to restrict the movement of a vehicle (for example, by using another vehicle to prevent it being driven away).

 

To be guilty of the offence, a person must undertake one of these actions with the intention of preventing or inhibiting a person entitled to move the vehicle concerned from moving the vehicle. Consequently, a person who moved an obstructively parked vehicle a short distance intending to regain access to his or her property would not be committing the offence in circumstances where he or she did not intend to prevent the driver of the vehicle from subsequently retrieving it.

 

Similarly, the required intention would not be present in the case of a person applying a wheel clamp to his or her own vehicle to prevent theft. The offence does not apply where a person is acting with lawful authority when immobilising, moving or restricting the movement of a vehicle.

 

There are a number of bodies with statutory powers to immobilise or remove vehicles in specified circumstances, including:

 

local authorities when enforcing road traffic contraventions on the public highway or local authority managed car parks;

 

the police when enforcing road traffic contraventions or otherwise removing vehicles that are illegally, obstructively or dangerously parked;

 

the police and local authorities when exercising their powers to remove abandoned vehicles from public and private land;

 

the Department for Transport’s Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority (“DVLA”) in respect of vehicles that have no road tax;

 

the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency in respect of vehicles that are not roadworthy; and

 

the police and local authorities when exercising their powers to remove vehicles forming part of an unauthorised traveller encampment.

 

In addition, bailiffs have a mix of statutory and common law powers to immobilise and tow away vehicles for the purposes of enforcing debts (including those arising out of unpaid taxes and court fines)

Link to post
Share on other sites

In one particular case that was bought to my attention yesterday, the debtor had been advised to make a police complaint after an enforcement agent clamped her vehicle on her driveway in relation to a local authority (in this case LB of Southwark) issued parking charge notice.

 

The debtor has been advised to include in her police complaint as 'evidence' a 'parliamentary document' which supposedly 'proved' that bailiffs are not exempt from Section 54 if a wheel clamp had been applied to the vehicle. The so called 'evidence' can be read in the following link: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... o/pf43.htm

 

For anyone considering relying upon this document they need to be aware that this Memorandum from CIVEA is merely one of many submissions that were made to the government under the Consultation process regarding clause 54 of the Protection of Freedoms Act.

 

This 'submisssion' was submitted a year before the Act gained Royal Assent.

 

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmpublic/protection/memo/pf43.htm

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...