News from Last week December 2008 NGP's NEW PARKING SPOT NAME AND SHAME THREAD
Thanks to an anonymous photographer who captured this pic during the last week of December 2008 because he had a camera phone handy at the time and which today, 14th April 09, I have decided to call the thread the "Name and Shame" thread after the 'name and shame' page of ngpltd (which page incidentally holds no records of their own touch of illegal parking activity hiding just around the corner from Bute Crescent on double yellow lines, at a bus stop and on the pavement). Can we have a fair deal to all in law please? Not only for traffic law, but including CPS dealing with assault cases instead of dismissing a case where a physical assault landed a local businessman in a Cardiff hospital for several days? 
So...who IS this parking half on the pavement, half on double yellows AND at a bus stop? Its...NGPLTD...
Just around the corner from Bute Crescent. Do they hide behind brick walls? No! they hide around the corner safely tucked away on bits of the road the police would pick up anyone else on for illegal parking. DOUBLE YELLOWS, BUS STOP, HALF ON THE PAVEMENT. See: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_069860 "Double yellow lines indicate a prohibition of waiting at any time even if there are no upright signs." "You MUST NOT park partially or wholly on the pavement in London, and should not do so elsewhere unless signs permit it." "243 DO NOT stop or park...at or near a bus or tram stop or taxi rank"
CLAMPING - WHAT CAN WE DO?
What can I do to help to change things?
1. EMAIL AN MP : "...Any residents who have had similar ordeals at the hands of clamping firms are urged to email Mr Austin at austini@parliament.uk..." Read complete article further down the page.
2. SIGN A PETITION : There is an e-petition in progress asking the Prime Minister for stronger legislation to protect motorists from private car parking companies, including limits to be put on clamping charges. The more signatures that the petition gains, the better. CLICK HERE TO SIGN.
3. EMAIL THE RAC FOUNDATION : “...Every week desperate motorists call the Foundation and ask for help in appealing against outrageous fines imposed in the most dubious of circumstances. We want to expose the intimidating bully-boy tactics used by some of the UK’s clampers, who are observing the letter but not the spirit of the SIA licensing scheme. There is huge concern amongst many motorists who are coerced into paying extortionate fines. Motorists have no means of redress other than expensive court action against some quite frightening individuals. We are keen to pass on the worst clamping cases to MPs so that they will reconsider the need for statutory regulation and a proper appeals system, like the one for parking tickets issued by councils. We are not expecting many entries for the award for clamper with a heart. However, examples of worst practice should be sent to us at cowboyclampers@racfoundation.co.uk where they will be judged and one individual will win the infamous title of UK's worst clamper."
4. PHONE THE FERRET : "The TV program The Ferret are hoping to be investigating the situation in Cardiff Bay where public land is being "changed" into private and sold or used for private gain and they are also going to investigate the increased use of private clamping companies. If you have any comments please contact The Ferret on 029 2059 0000 and tell them your story..." Read complete message from 'Anon' (12th March 08) in the Guestbook.
5. PHONE CARDIFF COUNCIL PLANNING : "Another contact you might want to make is Alan Grove on 029 2087 1669 - he is the man who dealt with the planning application from Bellway Homes..." Please see both messages of 12th March from 'Anon' as in the Guestbook link above.
6. CONTACT ALUN MICHAEL MP : Contact details for Alun Michael can be found at his website HERE.
'Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little.' Edmund Burke
UPDATE 10th APRIL 2008
Report was received here on 8th April that on Monday the 7th April 2008, a new sign was erected in Bute Crescent. This photo accompanied that report:
This however conflicts with information received from various sources who have spoken to Cardiff Council Highway representatives and so further investigations need to be made.
NEWS UPDATE 14 March 2008: DVLA MAKES £MILLIONS EVERY YEAR SELLING MOTORISTS DETAILS FOR £2.50 TO CLAMPERS -- MURDERER LEVI BELLFIELD RAN A CLAMPING FIRM
SUN ARTICLE 14th MARCH 2008
"Drivers ‘sold out’ by DVLA
MILLIONS of pounds a year are being raked in by the DVLA selling drivers’ details to clampers, it emerged yesterday. For £2.50, parking firms can buy the records of motorists staying too long on their property. The DVLA, which keeps records of 38 million drivers, has collected £9million through the practice since 2002. It also allows firms to sign up to its database for £3,000."
JUST HOW SAFE IS SELLING NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF MOTORISTS TO CLAMPING FIRMS? ARE THE DVLA AWARE OF THE RISKS THEY ARE TAKING WITH OTHER PEOPLE'S SAFETY WHEN THUGS HAVE NAMES AND ADDRESSES SOLD TO THEM?
BBC ARTICLE 26th FEB 2008
|
Bellfield given 'whole life' term | ||
Levi Bellfield, 39, from west London, bludgeoned Amelie Delagrange, 22, and Marsha McDonnell, 19, after they got off buses in south-west London. He was also found guilty of trying to kill Kate Sheedy, then 18, in 2004 and has been named as a prime suspect in the 2002 murder of Milly Dowler, 13. ..." | ||
CCTV of victims
The mob terrorised motorists across the South East. They even preyed on pregnant women and OAPs, forcing them to pay hundreds in cash to release their cars. Ex-pal Richard “Yosser” Hughes said: “Levi would clamp their cars, even if they weren’t illegally parked.
“He’d get threatening if anyone complained. It was demanding money with menaces.”
Evil ... from left, Kelly, Gharu and Moran
Bellfield used aliases and different company names for his operation. [Ed: So they were REGISTERED then?]
Hughes added: “There was nothing Levi wouldn’t do to make a pound. He sold drugs by the bucket while working as a bouncer.”
He bought his drugs from paedophile Vic Kelly, jailed for eight years in 2005 for grooming girls for sex by plying them with cocaine.
Hughes told how Bellfield would wait outside a brothel in West Drayton, West London, with a video camera to blackmail men going inside.
He said: “When they came out he would tell them they were on film and threaten to send it to their homes unless they paid up.” [Ed: And where did they get the mens' addresses from?]
Bellfield’s cronies included Noel “Tinker” Moran, 23 — jailed for life last year after hacking a man to death with a sword.
Bellfield and Moran were pictured together in local newspaper The Chichester Observer while overseeing parking at a leisure centre in the West Sussex town.
Bosses were forced to suspend the clamping operation amid public protests over their outrageous methods. Also on Bellfield’s crew was Suraj Gharu, 27. He was jailed for five years in November 2005 after having sex with a 14-year-old girl he targeted at a Hillingdon Council children’s home.
Tell us what you think of this story
So why don't the powers that be investigate the backgrounds of wheel-clampers to prevent this...RICHMOND&TWICKENHAM TIMES ARTICLE 4th JAN 2008
'Angry clampers threw stones and bolts at our vehicle'
A man who assumed his car had been stolen after it disappeared from where he had parked it has had to hand over £1,140 to clampers who had towed it away...
...More than two weeks later Paul received a call from police telling him they had found his car in a compound where it had been towed by private company, Regional Clamping Services, which operates in the Coach and Horses car park.
By the time Paul went to pick up the vehicle on December 24, the car had been at the compound in Iver, Middlesex, for 23 days, and the release fee was £1,140 - comprising a £300 towing fee and £35-a-day storage fee.
Paul went to the car pound, accompanied by reporter Alex Hayes and a photographer.
He said six clampers at the site became agitated and aggressive at the sight of the reporter and photographer.
Journalist Alex Hayes said: "At one point one approached me and demanded I delete all footage we had taken or he would not release the car and threatened to clamp the photographers' car.
"Eventually the cash only payment was made and the car was released from the compound, but as we drove away stones and bolts were hurled at our car by the employees.
"Legislation covering the towing of vehicles on private property is vague, only requiring a security industry association licence and a receipt being issued.
"However, as long as legislation remains lax, events like this will occur on a daily basis to people across the capital."
Approached by the Brentford, Chiswick and Isleworth Times an employee of Regional Clamping Services said "no comment" immediately after he heard the call was from a newspaper.
When it was pointed out he didn't yet know what the call was about he said "don't really care" and put down the phone..." (Read complete article via header link above. It would seem arrogant clamping thugs have become confident enough to believe they are above the law - and that is because the law is letting them get away with it.)
SUNDAY MAIL ARTICLE 12th FEB 2007"DVLA sells your details to criminals
Last updated at 09:35am on 12th February 2007
Clamped: Criminals sold driver data
The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) tells would-be wheel-clampers there is "no problem" with them buying drivers' home addresses - even if they have a criminal record.
Indeed, the two bosses of one clamping firm on the list of companies to whom the DVLA is happy to sell drivers' details are currently serving seven years' jail between them for extorting money from motorists...." (Read complete article via header link above).
Interestingly, there are many recorded incidents of shameful and criminal behaviour by clampers on the internet although none can be found on the NGPLTD "Name and Shame" page at the time of writing.
DELAYS IN CONTACTING NGP?
Delays encountered when contacting NGP in writing may be because New Generation Parking Management Limited, Company Number 05879515, is registered under the address 37b New Cavendish Street, London as, incidentally, is National Parking Management which deals with Appeals.
37b New Cavendish Street London is an "accommodation" (or 'mailing') address from London Office Service and, as such, bears no particular relationship to the actual area wherein the company operates. These addresses are often extremely useful for businesses with no office premises of their own, although there can occasionally be serious risks involved for customers or clients as demonstrated in the warning issued by Cardiff Council Trading Standards and reported by News Wales in 2005.
37b New Cavendish Street London W1G 8JR
(Photo from: All In London online directory)
UPDATE: Address given for NGP LTD in Twist Local directory is: 27d Tudor Lane, Riverside, Cardiff, CF11 6Z and, as you will see in an article below, Antony Roberts is the director.
UPDATE 13th MARCH: This may also be an accommodation address or an out of date address because, according to Page 11 of this vosa.gov.uk pdf document, an application appears to have been approved with regard to the use of 27d Tudor Lane as an operating center to an entirely different trader.
REPORTS OF CAR CLAMPING by 'NEW GENERATION PARKING' (NGP) for BELLWAY HOMES
"11th January 2008
REPORTS are being received that vehicles in BUTE CRESCENT, MERMAID QUAY, are being clamped and removed with very high costs to unclamp/recover. Unfortunately, first time visitors are not likely to visit this website but for any that do, and for confused residents, here are the fees displayed on an NPG sign on the crescent.
"Clamp Release fee 125.00
Parking Charge Notice 75.00
Towing Away Fee 250.00
TOTAL CHARGES: £ 450.00
STORAGE (PER DAY): 35.00"
People are complaining that they cannot get a response from the 0870 8507103 telephone number given [check out 08700 numbers HERE] at night and so incur problems not only with the stated costs of recovering their car and getting home, but also by so incurring an extra 'storage per day' charge, despite NPG's website assuring people that they have 'staff readily available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week all year round'.
NGP's Towing away statement:
"...Towing
Any vehicle clamped for a specified period of time, or blocking a Fire Exit or other access area is liable for removal. In any case vehicles will not be removed unreasonably.
Circumstances where vehicles will be removed include those where:
• a vehicle is causing an obstruction to Fire Exits.
• a vehicle is causing an obstruction to other car park users generally.
• a vehicle has been left beyond a specified period and is blocking our client’s parking resources.
• a vehicle has been abandoned.
• a vehicle is persistently parked in contravention of the Terms & Conditions of a site...."
Other related useful information:
http://www.britishparking.co.uk
CLAMPING COMPLAINT?
http://www.britishparking.co.uk/page.php?id=9#3
"...Who can help me with a clamping complaint?
On-street
In England and Wales the law only regulates parking enforcement on-street. If you want to appeal/complain about being clamped on a public road contact your local council.
On private land
Anyone engaged in clamping on private land must be licensed by the Security Industry Authority (SIA). If you have a complaint against a clamper contact the SIA to check that they have a licence, and to find out how to lodge a complaint against that clamper.
Security Industry Authority (SIA)
Web: www.the-sia.org.uk/home/licensing
Tel: 08702 430 100
What can I do if I have a complaint against a company I believe to be a member of the BPA?
If you have a complaint with a company that you believe to be a member of the BPA, follow their complaints procedure in order to resolve the issue. If you feel the issue has not been resolved satisfactorily, please write (by post or email) detailing the nature of your complaint and enclosing copies of any correspondence you have had with the company. The BPA cannot get involved in individual cases and will not undertake to follow up on individual complaints. However, if a large number of complaints are received against a BPA member this may result in a review of the members membership status.
If your complaint is against a company that operates clamping services, always contact the SIA in the first instance to check the employees that carry out clamping are licenced. "
PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU WILL SEE FROM AN ARTICLE BELOW, THE BPA DO NOT FEEL THE "CHARGES ARE OUT OF THE ORDINARY".
20.02.08 "CLAMPING CURBS CALLED FOR BY MP"
 |
| Above: Dudley North MP Ian Austin and clamping victim Pam Houghton |
DRIVERS have been warned to avoid parking at a Dudley spot after "totally disgraceful" clamping charges of up to hundreds of pounds by private firms.
Angry motorists have been stung by fines of up to £325 after parking their vehicles on a paved area on Tower Street, in Dudley town centre.
Now town MP Ian Austin has called for better regulations for clamping in a bid to curb the fines after receiving a mountain of complaints from irate drivers.
Some have been forced to hand over £150 to have their vehicle released even if they have mistakenly leaving their car at the area opposite the old fire station for just five minutes.
Furious Mr Austin said:"The way the clamping companies are operating in this area is a total disgrace.
"I have seen with my own eyes the way one of their employees has sat in his van waiting for people to park in the wrong place. As soon as they have walked away, the company's removal truck appears and removes the car.
"The whole thing can take just a few minutes and the unfortunate shopper is landed with a massive bill to get their car back.
"On constituent had to travel to the other side of Birmingham and hand over £325.
"Even if someone is parked somewhere they shouldn't be, it is a disgrace that someone can clamp their car and charge whatever they want to release it.
"I am calling for greater regulation of this industry as I feel that it will give greater power to the people who are being charged incredible sums to have their car released after having mistakenly parked in an area being run by a private clamping firm."
Any residents who have had similar ordeals at the hands of clamping firms are urged to email Mr Austin at austini@parliament.uk
10:27am Wednesday 20th February 2008"
DVLA send vehicle licence holders information to Clampers
"...a number of services including;
ANPR (Numbeplate regognition) [sic]
Ticketing
Clamping..."
The NGP WEBSITE explains that it applies to the DVLA for details of the vehicle's owner if parked outside of the time allocated.
Clamping Difference between Scotland and the rest of the UK? ASK GORDON BROWN - our Scottish PM
|
BBC ARTICLE 1st November 2007
"Carry on clamping... | |||||
Question: What is illegal in Scotland on the grounds that it constitutes "extortion and theft" but has just cost a Medway woman a perfectly legal £350? Answer: Wheel clamping on private land. It has been against the law in Scotland since 1992, but continues to proliferate in England and Wales. Whilst the government are trying to reduce the amount of clamping on public roads, the Department of Transport insists: "We are strongly discouraging clamping to anyone but persistent evaders. Clamping is not efficient or effective when used for regular on-street parking enforcement. There may be exceptional circumstances, for example with persistent evaders". Cowboys The regulation of clampers on private land is still, in many people's eyes, falling short of offering protection from "cowboys". The RAC describe the clamping scenario thus: "It is midnight; you are on your way home from a dinner party. You arrive at the station car park, to find your ticket has expired and you have been clamped. "You ring the premium rate number stuck to your windscreen. Half an hour later a clamper arrives, claiming you owe him not only the clamp release fee but also a 'cancellation' fee as the tow truck has been called to pick up your vehicle.
"Either you pay up £300 or he will tow your car away and charge you £30 extra a day for storage". Expensive evening Sally Pearson recently left her car in a private car park at 7.20 in the evening in Chatham. There was no-one on the gate and she presumed all would be fine. When she returned, she found her car had been clamped and the company was demanding £350 on the spot to release the car. Worried that if she did not pay then and there, the car would be towed, Sally paid up. Back in 2001, the government passed legislation in order to set up a licensing scheme for clampers. Motoring organisations claim that the law was changed "on the cheap" as the government responded in a knee-jerk fashion to a number of high profile clamping stories. As enthusiastic clamping firms immobilised ambulances, hearses and almost anyone who left their car unattended for more than a minute. Flawed bill?
The government tacked the clamping legislation on the back of the Security Industry Act - designed to deal primarily with the regulation of nightclub bouncers and doormen. The Security Industry Authority (SIA) was set up in 2003 to implement the licence scheme for clampers. The problem, according to a number of pressure groups, is that you could drive a coach and horses through the gaps in the bill, always assuming they haven't been clamped in the pub car park first. Far from protecting the public, the government has simply pushed the problem further down the line.
It is true that all clampers now have to have a licence, but once granted, there seem to be few standards to which they must adhere. The RAC are: "...concerned that there are inherent flaws with the licensing scheme arising from the fact that there is no enforceable code of practice that clampers have to abide by upon receiving a licence. "We are concerned that once clampers have received their licence, they will then be able to go about their activities unchecked, and will still be able to charge as much as they like". Clear signs A number of e-petitions on the Number 10 website call for an urgent review of the law for private clampers. In March 2007, the Private Parking (Regulation) Bill was presented to Parliament. David Wright MP sets out the concerns. He said: "The problem is that there is no clarity about the sort of signage that private clamping companies have to provide on sites before clamping is undertaken. "There is no standard process. The fees are also a problem. The legislation simply states that fees should be 'reasonable'. That causes several difficulties." But the Association of British Drivers (ABD) claim that more legislation will simply mean that the stable door is shut long after the horse has bolted.
As far as they are concerned, private clamping is an inevitable by-product of the 1991 Road Traffic Act which set out to decriminalise parking enforcement. Status quo remains Once parking offences were dealt with by local authorities under a civil code the ABD claim that profit making companies were bound to move in, ¿As long as law enforcement is in the hands of private companies motivated by profit, abuse will continue and the perception of abuse, even if it is not present, will be widespread.¿ Apparently, in 2005, a survey showed that of all the drivers in an urban area at any one time, one in five would be looking for an elusive place to park. If public, local authority controlled parking was widely available, says the ABD, there would be no need for private spaces and the clampers would be out of business. There seems to be little appetite in England or Wales to go down the Scottish road and criminalise private parking enforcement. The emphasis remains on the right of private landowners to control parking on their own property. But it is impossible to gauge the level of money involved in private parking regulation in the South East, simply because no-one is charged with monitoring it. The SIA knows that over 1,500 individuals hold valid SIA VI licences but cannot give a figure for the average charge for clamping release or the number of private spaces controlled by the clamping companies. This is because, again, no-one is collating that information. If the figures released by the Association of British Drivers are true, that Motorists paid over £1.2bn in parking charges in 2005, perhaps it is time that they were. Should the government do more to protect the motorist? Is there a lack of safe, cheap public parking in the region? We would like to include as many of your views as possible so: Text us on 07786 209252 or email us at politicsshowsoutheast@bbc.co.uk or via the link below. The earlier we receive your comments the more likely we are to get them on air. You don't have to wait until the show has started! " | |||||
UPDATE
11th February: Have spoken to the Council who were most helpful and confirmed that Bute Crescent is a PRIVATE ROAD.
Presumably it belongs to BELLWAY HOMES as the road was a part of the plot that they are now building on. A photo showing the road will be added below.
As a Private Road, see earlier post, complaints regarding clamping and related issues should be addressed to the SIA:
"...On private land
Anyone engaged in clamping on private land must be licensed by the Security Industry Authority (SIA). If you have a complaint against a clamper contact the SIA to check that they have a licence, and to find out how to lodge a complaint against that clamper.
Security Industry Authority (SIA)
Web: www.the-sia.org.uk/home/licensing
Tel: 08702 430 100..."
Complaints can, and perhaps should, also be made to BELLWAY HOMES whose website is at: http://www.bellway.co.uk and address in Cardiff is:
Alexander House
Excelsior Rd, Excelsior Ind Est, Cardiff, CF14 3AT, UK
029 20544700
You could also express your displeasure by posting in NGP's forum HERE but you will need to register there first.
Complaints of aggressive behaviour by NGP operaters leading to assault should, of course, also be reported to the police.
Without Bellway arranging the erection of a proper road sign saying PRIVATE ROAD, and the council being informed and so able to update their highways information, more unsuspecting visitors will find themselves regretting their visit to Mermaid Quay having been clamped and/or removed and suffered high financial loss as a result.
Do we really want visitors to equate Mermaid Quay and the surrounding areas with 'easy money' schemes by Bellway Homes and NGP charges of £450.00 and stay away, or do we want them to enjoy their visit and come again?
UPDATE 28th February
A little confused as to whether the picture here is a council road sign, or one made privately? If it is a standard road sign and the Council know that the road is not public, then why wouldn't the road sign indicate it was a private road? If it was commissioned privately by Bellway Homes, the same question could be asked of them.
UPDATE 29th February
Signs have appeared on the said newly built Bute Crescent. The following is copy-typed from a somewhat blurred photograph submitted of one of the signs and may contain errors, but is best effort.
"TRAFFIC PROPOSALS
The County Council of
(
1. The County Council of the City and
(i) leaving your vehicle at any time (no loading/unloading) in:
on its south side from its junction with
(a) boarding and alighting from a vehicle
(b) essential services and funerals
(ii) leaving your vehicle at any time in:
On its east side from its cul-de-sac end for a distance of 24 metres north and on its west side from its cul-de-sac end for a distance of 7 metres north.
Exemptions will be permitted for the following reasons:
(a) boarding and alighting from a vehicle
(b) loading and unloading of goods
(c) essential services and funerals
(d) for a maximum period of three hours vehicles when displaying a “Disabled Badge” and being used for the conveyance of disabled persons
(iii) leaving your vehicle (between the hours of 6.00 am and 6.30 pm
(Monday to Saturday) for more than two hours (return prohibited within 2 hours) in:
on its east side from a point 24 metres north of its cul-de-sac end for a distance of 23 metres north and
on its west side from a point 7 metres north of its cul-de-sac end for a distance of 41 metres north
Exemptions will be permitted for the following reasons:
(a) for a maximum period of three hours vehicles when displaying a "Disabled Badge" and being used for the conveyance of disabled persons
(b) essential services and funerals
2. Full details of the proposal may be seen at the address below during normal office hours
3. Any objections yo may have to the proposal must be submitted to me in writing by the 25th day of March 2008 and must contain the grounds on which you object. Any such objection may be made available for inspection by any interested parties
Dated this 28th day of February 2008
The Traffic Proposal brings up further questions:
1. Is Bute Crescent's "junction with Bute Street" the junction opposite the Paget which is the new junction to the newly constructed part of Bute Crescent where all the clamping is being done?
2. Does this mean that the newly built part of Bute Crescent was adopted by the Council after all as the Notice refers to proposed amendments to an "existing order"?
If so:
3. Then under whose authority have NGP been clamping cars and is it legal?
5. If not legal, then can the owners of vehicles who have been charged outrageous fees take legal action against NGP and/or the hiring party?
"EXTORTIONATE" fees
http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/news/cardiff-news/2008/01/24/clamped-and-it-cost-410-to-get-my-car-back-91466-20385915/
Clamped... and it cost £410 to get my car back
Jan 24 2008 by Lisa Jones, South Wales Echo
A CALL centre worker has had to fork out more than £400 to get his car back after it was towed away by clampers.
Paul Anley took a chance and parked in a private car park on Friday night, while he went to the cinema with his girlfriend.
He says the car park at the back of Leo Abse and Cohen Solicitors, Wesley Lane, in Cardiff’s city centre was deserted when he parked there at around 8.30pm.
But he says his car was towed away within minutes, leaving him to cough up the cash to get it returned.
The car park is monitored by New Generation Parking Ltd, which charged him a £125 clamp release fee, £250 as a towing away fee and £35-a-day storage.
Mr Anley, of Canton, Cardiff, said: “At night time, it’s deserted. I parked up and went to the cinema. Two hours later, my car was gone. I rang the number on the sign on the wall and they said they had my car. I knew it was a private car park, I’m holding my hands up, but £410 is extortionate. There’s nothing I could do because they had my car and I need it for work.”
Antony Roberts, director of NGP Ltd, which is an approved operator with the British Parking Association (BPA), said it immediately removed all unauthorised vehicles from that car park without discretion because it was used as a congregation point for staff at Leo Abse and Cohen in the event of a fire.
He said cars were clamped first, then towed away, which would take around 45 minutes.
Regarding the charges, he said: “We are a business. The BPA set the fees and we follow them.”
Robert Lloyd-Griffiths, director of marketing at Leo Abse and Cohen, said people had been leaving their cars there overnight, causing problems for staff the following morning.
“I wish that nobody was ever clamped,” he said. “I feel rotten for him. I would hate it if it was me. The signs are clearly there and I wish people would look at them. Paying £5 to park in one of the many car parks would have saved this man a lot of money. It’s been a very expensive trip to the cinema.”
A spokeswoman from the British Parking Association said cars parked over an emergency access were removed immediately, which was within their guidelines. The charges were also not out of the ordinary."
Webmaster: While Leo Abse Cohen may feel 'rotten for him' - they made the choice to use NGP. Do the majority of law firms in Cardiff use that same company? It would be interesting to know if some of NGP's charges for vehicle recovery are shared by those who hire their services (in this case Leo Abse for instance) - and IF so, what proportion of the total.
"LEO WOULD BE TURNING IN HIS GRAVE AT THE WAY HIS OLD FIRM - LEO ABSE & COHEN - ARE TREATING A WORKING CLASS MAN"
SOUTH WALES ECHO 5th FEB 2008
"Clamping cost was no trifling matter
Feb 5 2008 by Our Correspondent, South Wales Echo
I FEEL very sorry for Paul Anley of Canton, Cardiff, having to pay £410 to have his car released from the car park of Leo Abse & Cohen.
Leo would be turning in his grave at the way his old firm are treating a working class man.
Two years ago on a November Sunday with heavy rain and wind, my mother-in-law who was 98, said she would like a Marks and Spencer trifle.
My wife arrived in Charles Street at 4.45pm the roads were full of cars so she parked in Leo Abse’s car park.
At 5.05pm she returned to the car to find it clamped and a demand for £90.
I wrote a letter to Leo Abse and they did not have the good manners to reply..." (Read complete article via header link above)
BUTE CRESCENT
Photo taken 11.2.2008 from outside the The Paget which is opposite the entrance to Bute Crescent:
CHARGES DISPLAYED in BUTE CRESCENT
PHOTO OF SIGN ATTACHED TO THE HOARDINGS AROUND THE BELLWAY HOMES BUILDING SITE IN BUTE CRESCENT - EMAILED BY A LOCAL BUSINESSMAN:
From this you will see that once parked NGP are not required to give any notice before clamping or removing your vehicle, that paying via debit or credit card incurs a "further fee" of £5.00 and, even if your vehicle has not been towed away but a removal van is present, an "additional" fee of an amount not quite clear in the shot (will investigate and edit when established) is payable. They are not allowed to clamp or remove disabled cars, but nevertheless charge disabled vehicle owners, or drivers for disabled persons, £75 for a 'ticket'.
As you will see, they say that they are not responsible for loss or damage while your vehicle is in their possession and warn you to keep your valuables out of "site" [sic] possibly indicating that their private land is not adequately secure.
Whether their 'loss or damage to your vehicle' statement would be upheld in law needs to be established and information will be updated shortly.
Apparently NGP are acting in a few other Cardiff areas and one is near Atlantic Wharf on some new development not too far from Mermaid Quay (what a fast financial bonanza this must be).
So, if you are looking for parking and see the above sign or their van as pictured here:
http://www.ngpltd.com/homepage.html
BEWARE!
You are about to considerably boost company profits.
"GREEDY HIGHWAY HYENAS"
LINK to article
"Sean O'Grady: Who will rid us of these greedy highway hyenas?
Tuesday, 6 February 2007
You might have thought that those cowboy clampers had gone away. Well, you're wrong. They're still with us, only now they've been issued with a licence to extort. I discovered this at my cost.
I should have known better, but I parked my car on a little bit of private land while I popped into the bank. I was gone for about five minutes, but it was sufficient time for the clamper to turn up. I was held to ransom - or £125, to be exact. I appealed to the clamper in person, to no avail. I was met with a mantra: "private land, private land, private land, private land", as if he'd been taught it at some clamping finishing school. He dared me to call the police, which I did, to no avail. I called the company concerned, Controlled Parking Services, and they were predictably unsympathetic. I paid up and then appealed. After a week, I've yet to hear back.
Apparently, these modern-day pirates on private land are regulated by something called the Security Industry Authority, but again, this body, which might expect to want to "clamp down" on unreasonable, disproportionate and excessive charging, could provide neither help nor sympathy.
A Robert Buxton told me that neither he nor his authority had a view on what had befallen me and that he had "no control over that" and " no comment on that". Thanks, Robert, for being so helpful and forthcoming.
Interestingly, when the law was changed and this body was set up a couple of years ago, its chairman, Peter Hermitage said:
"The licensing of vehicle immobilisers provides the opportunity to set standards and drive out bad practice."
Yeah, right.
Ought I to be looking for sympathy? I think so. If the aim is to deter people from parking on private land, then these agents can issue tickets that can be pursued in the courts. Clamping cars immediately does no one any good, except for the greedy clamping firms, lying in wait like the hyenas of the highways they are. It seems all too obvious to me that this sort of action is purely motivated by greed.
Catch as many unsuspecting motorists as possible and you just about cover your overheads, the cost of employing a goon and an old van or two. It is not, I suspect, much to do with controlling traffic flow and access.
What's wrong with making some cash out of a few dumb motorists? Well, nothing, I suppose, but I can't help thinking that this is not what Parliament intended when it changed the law to outlaw "cowboy clampers". I think our legislators envisaged a penalty of £125 to be issued as a maximum amount in last resort, rather than used as a way to milk drivers. At any rate, you would be well advised to keep well away from any pieces of private land, or what appears to be private land.
What I would love to do is take the clamping company to court and claim that its charge was disproportionate and amounting to extortion and, crucially, far removed from what Parliament intended in the first place. Courtrooms are normally the forum to settle that kind of thing, so it seems. Courts are always saying that they knew what Parliament wanted, even when Parliament does not seem to know what it wanted when it made the law.
Of course, sadly, I lack the funds to launch a serious legal assault: however, if there are any clever, public-spirited and sympathetic lawyers out there willing to help me in this cause, I would be grateful. We need one of those test-case rulings to put these clamping companies in their place.
We need to go all the way with this one, the House of Lords, Europe, wherever the fight for justice takes us. After all, you lawyers could be next for a (legal) cowboy clamp....
HOUSE OF COMMONS DEBATE ON WHEELCLAMPERS
EXTRACT FROM HOUSE OF COMMONS DEBATE:
"...Mr. Clarke: The MP was out in the centre of Norwich with the police at that time of the morning a couple of weeks ago, and I think that the numbers were about 50 per cent. higher than they would otherwise have been because the word had got around that I was going to be there.
There are serious points relating to this. For example, the city safe scheme in Manchester, which I commend, involves a radio system between all the bouncers and the
police to ensure that issues can be dealt with rapidly. That requires mutual confidence. In Norwich, there have recently been two tragic deaths of young people, and the question of how bouncers have operated has been important. We have a compact between the police, the local authority, the clubs and the bouncers to improve professional standards. That will be an important aspect of what we do.Wheelclampers form a second important sector regulated by the Bill. I want to pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster, Central (Ms Winterton), whom I am delighted to see in her place today. She has been a strong, consistent campaigner for proper regulation of the industry, and, since being elected to the House, has taken an active, positive approach to the issue, which I want to place on record.
We are addressing the issue of wheelclamping on private land--that is, land that is not a road to which the general public has access. Roads are separately regulated under the Road Traffic Acts. In our view, landowners must be able to take action against those who park on private land without permission, and wheelclamping--or at least the threat of it--may be an effective way to deal with irresponsible parking. However, it is crucial that such wheelclamping is carried out in a reasonable manner. To some extent, the law has already enshrined those principles. For example, in 1995, the Court of Appeal adjudged, in the case of Arthur and Arthur v. Anker, that clampers had acted legally as adequate warning signs had been displayed, the release fee was reasonable and there was a reasonable method of payment.
The judgment provided useful guidelines, but only in broad terms, to courts faced with similar cases. The court did not define a general standard for the size of signs or what a "reasonable" release fee might be. That leaves the motorist who is aggrieved at having his or her car clamped on private land with only limited practical means of redress. Unless the behaviour of the clamper is outrageous, the motorist may well be uncertain of his or her rights and may also be dissuaded from going to court by the potential cost of legal fees.
We believe that that gap in the law needs to be filled, which is why the Bill ensures that all wheelclamping on private land carried out as a business or as part of one's employment, or for a release fee, will be regulated by a licensing system. Each individual who provides wheelclamping services to others will therefore need a licence, as will his or her director or manager.
We also considered whether the licensing regime needed to cover the wheelclamping by businesses of cars on their own land using their own employees, or in-house wheelclamping. We concluded that it did. Immobilising a car gives the clamper such power over the car owner, with all the inherent danger of that power being abused, that we would leave the public open to the risk of further abuses were we not to legislate...".
LICENSING LEGISLATION DOESN'T SEEM TO HAVE WORKED TOO WELL, DOES IT!
Have you got further info regarding NGP that you want to bring to attention?
Contact the webmaster HERE.