Isn't it the case that this 'extortion' is illegal in Scotland?
If ministers did not have chauffeurs, this injustice would have been fixed years ago.
Perhaps not; the fees might just have go on "expenses".
My first reaction to the comparison of penalties is that £60 for speeding in this day and age is far too low. Wouldn't £600 create a more effective deterrent to Mr Toad?
Mr Toad
... reminds me of this delicious typo from a PSR ...
"... if the Court were minded to sentence this defendant toady ..."
Remember that Toad got nineteen of his twenty-year sentence for making nasty remarks to the police.
netball coach said
"Isn't it the case that this 'extortion' is illegal in Scotland? "
I believe it comes under Demanding Money With Menaces.
Btw, it does not pay to be impolite with these fellows since they can make much mischief before they un-clamp your car.
Keep an angle grinder in your car, the cost of replacing their padlock is far lower than their parking 'charges'. Police will not intevene as it's a civil dispute.
Talking of Typos in PSR's, the very first report I ever "gate-kept" told a tale of a violent man who worked unusual hours and thus, could not undertake any sort of evening-based programme.
It was unfortunate, therefore, that I failed to notice (although the bench did) that the PSR Author had talked quite blindly about the man's "rotating shit patterns"
As for clampers, they are the work of the devil
JVIP
Do those rotating patterns occur after the stuff has hit the fan?
Don't rely on that. Dai. It would almost certainly be criminal damage to cut off a clamp, even if you offered to pay for a new padlock afterwards.
There's a reference in the current Magistrate journal recording the incredulity of the bench on discovering that the annual earnings of the defendant were £144,000. His occupation - clamper!
That's a possibilty Bystander, but previous good character, immediate offer of reparation, extreme provocation - I would suggest 6 month CD and £50 costs, far cheaper than giving in to highway robbery.
Oh, what a can of worms this one is!!
In Scotland wheel clamping on private land is unlawful. That was decided in Black v Carmichael 1992. It can occur on highways in some circumstances. The present government has more than once indicated that there are no plans to change this. That’s politics for you!! In any event, it is probably a matter devolved to the Scottish Parliament.
For England and Wales, Lynne Jones MP offers as good an explanation of the present situation as I can find:
http://www.lynnejones.org.uk/Pri...%
20Clamping.htm
Here is a link to the Private Securities Industry Act 2001 (as originally enacted)
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts...2_en_1#pb2-
l1g3
The English civil law on clamping is discussed in Vine v London Borough of Waltham Forest – Court of Appeal.
http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/ma...&
method=boolean
In the Vine case, the judges refer to the earlier case of Arthur & Another v Anker & Another [1997] QB 564. This decided that warning notices have to be displayed; the amount of the release fee has to be “reasonable”; and arrangements must be in place to enable the prompt release of a vehicle once the vehicle owner has indicated that he is willing to pay the release fee.
If the vehicle owner removes wheel-clamps or tries to remove them there is the possibility of an offence of criminal damage: Lloyd v DPP [1992] 1 All ER 982. Also, technically, there is the legal possibility that the clamper could sue for trespass to his goods!!
Like many things in our country, if this were made a major political issue with votes depending on it then we would see changes. Perhaps we are too acquiescent a population!!
I quite liked Dom Joly's show where he parked a car then when the clamper appeared, sneaked up and clamped the clamper's van. I don't know how it ended though, but it was very funny to watch.
Hardly a big problem is it? you don't want to be clamped, don't park on someone else's land without their permission.
Ah! The "if you've done nothing wrong, you've nothing to fear" defence. And none improved for being wheeled out on its latest ineffectual, limp showing. I'd have more sympathy with the clampers position if they were required, before clamping, to give the vehicle owner a statement that they were about to park on private land and an opportunity to move the car. If someone was dumb enough to ignore that, they deserve to pay the "release fee".
@radams "Hardly a big problem is it? "
It is if you arrive after midnight at your SW Trains car park because the service was late/cancelled/reduced to a slow bus service, and you find your car clamped because the daily charging period starts again at midnight. In addition to failing to provide the service advertised, SW Trains then expect you to meekly accept being clamped.
Dai was right, the angle grinder approach is an entirely understandable response. Besides, any charge of criminal damage has to be related to the damage caused, which for a new padlock can't be more than about £10. For those that insist on having their money’s worth though, putting the clamp through the clamper van’s windscreen ought to do the trick.
One has to wonder if your "crop-headed tattooed men" hold the requisite frontline licenses from the SIA and are clearly wearing their badges when clamping - failure on either count being a criminal offence.
And do the directors of the company behind hold the necessary non-frontline SIA licence - if not, another criminal offence
Sounds like an 'Arthur Daley' type of business to me. I can imagine "Terry" remonstrating with "Arfer" about clamping granny's old Vauxhall Viva,
Leave it out Arfer, she could buy another 2 Vivas for the cost of unclamping that one!
(And "clamped" granny turns out to be one of Arfer's "indoors", the final twist in Arfer's usual screw-ups--c'mon BBC, give us another series with Arfer and Terry, call it "Clamper Minder.")
On the subject of non-Police security licenses and wot not.
The head of security at my local shopping centre tells me that he and his men have recieved Police training in the use of handcuffs and that they are Licensed to use them on the public.
Licensed by whom and under which law are these private citizens allowed to shackle, and presumably detain, other citizens ?
some bloke:
Lies.
These private security guards are *not* entitled to use any handcuffs or other restraining devices at all.
They have exactly the same powers of arrest as any other private citizen in the uk, which is the power to "arrest" a person found committing an arrestable offence.
They just have a snazzier hat than most, and probably some gold braiding too ?
@ Aussie NSW Solicitor
"'mon BBC, give us another series with Arfer and Terry, call it "Clamper Minder."
'Minder' was ITV - pretty much the only decent program that channel has ever produced, so there's little chance that it would ever come back unless they could shoehorn a viewer phone-in. (Say, filming three alterative endings that viewers could vote for before the final ad break).
"unwary, often elderly, drivers may simply fail to see the notices."
Hmmm... but how do you decide who can't see and who don't care?
(I don't. These matters do not come to court)
Also - an elderly driver should be just as capable of seeing a roads notice as an average-aged driver, otherwise they should be turning in their licence.
(These are not road signs, they are densely-printed notices, black on white, anout 18" square)
The above should not be seen as an endorsement of clampers which like many social ills is an overzealous response to a genuine problem - that of congestion due to careless drivers.
(This is nothing to do with congestion on the highway. These people operate on private land)
Edited By Siteowner
I was shopping the other day (joy of joys), and as I walking from one out of town site to another - I'm too lazy to drive from one spot to another, I saw a clamping notice. This was sited as you drove in, visible only as you negotiated a roundabout. I wonder who had the time to look at the densely worded sign at this point.
Once this had caught my attention, I start to for other signs, and I only managed to spot one other, a long distance from where anyone would want to ideally park, and not on a route where cars would normally pass.
So, the clampers have fulfilled the rules by displaying the notices, but in such a way that the driver may not have noticed that they are liable for clamping.
Cunning eh!
This BBC News article is quite appropriate - not quite the use of the angle-grinder under discussion here, but clamping anyway.
Chris -
Since the Serious Organized Crime and Police Act (2005) we no longer have "arrestable offences" in England and Wales. A constable can arrest for any offence, if one or more specified necessity tests are met.
For the public, the right of a citizen's arrest is for indictable offences only.
As for handcuffs, it is not illegal per se for anyone to own and use a pair. But I'd suggest you are opening up a can of worms if you were to arrest someone or try a citizen's arrest for a non-indicatable offence...
Sorry last line of above should read "I'd suggest any private security guards would be opening up a can of worms if they were to injure someone using their cuffs (esaily done) or try to use them to arrest someone for a non-indicatable offence etc etc"
"As a security guard (a supervisor) I can tell you that cuffs may only be used by members of the public to restrain someone in certain limited circumstances. They may only be used to stop someone from harming other people, themselves or from damaging property, if physical restraint by security staff, or other MOP's, has been tried & failed. The only type of cuffs allowed for use by members of the public is the chain-linked type. Fixed linked cuffs are only for use by police & certain other statutory undertakers, as they are for controlling a resisting subject.
Incidentally, handcuffs are not the only restraints that may be used. Cable ties, provided they are of sufficient width to avoid injury may be used (indeed that is what they were invented for, by the Israelis) & rope may be used, with the proviso that they are only put on tight enough to restrict the subject's movement of his/her hands
http://www.policeoracle.com/foru...ts.asp?
TID=7609
News to me but, as I said, our locals were trained by the Police and they should know !
And stocks were invented by the British and the Guillotine by some Frenchman - what the hell is the relevance of the nationality of the 'inventors' of cable ties unless its yet another snide little dig
Defender | 05.13.08 - 1:51 pm There was no snide little dig; that quote in full was to illustrate the view of a civilian Private Security Guard on his ability to use restraints on members of the public.
If you wish to take issue with it I would suggest that you follow the link and do so there.
Thank you for introducing Stocks, an excellent example of Community Retributive Justice, perhaps someone would mention it to Gordon.
Commenting by HaloScan
