Uk wheelclamping – RAC says illegal if charges excessive

Barrister Dr Chris Elliott’s report reviewing private-property parking regulations has been published by the RAC. He saying "The Home Office is proposing a new licensing regime for private clampers, but it is arguable that, if the release fee is unreasonable, their actions are incompatible with the Human Rights Act 1998 which demands that punishment should only come after a proper legal process." He went on: "The purpose of clamping is to prevent a vehicle being removed from land it should not be on. On the face of it, clamping is perverse since it causes the harm to the landowner to persist. It is in effect a 'self-inflicted wound. Dr Elliott continued to advise that provided there are clear warning signs that the driver saw and appreciated, the driver 'consented' to be clamped as far as Courts were concerned.

 

Two issues stem from the above: (1) whether a “release fee” be unreasonable and (2) whether a driver either saw or appreciated parking regulation signage. Reference to a Human Right’s Act is reference to a STANDARD apparently for the purpose of creating a standard but what of current standards in respect of current parking signage?. Its all about “standards”.    

 

Do Courts question signage as to the display of penalty costs resulting from being clamped, sign size, lettering size as well as sign placement(s). Do signs stipulate that private land owners have a right to take possession of anothers property until a fine be paid?. Least not forget a Countries economy based upon “tourism” to which different languages are applicable by car park users, it being globalisation as to travel.  

 

In another Country one may see signs at the road side which simply state P 60 or P 90 or P 120 on a blue background to which logic suggests P represents Parking and the undefined units of measurement to the number be minutes. Of course one could argue that since the units are not specified you can attach your own – ie: minutes, hours or days. Is it for the Courts to educate all motorists through punishments to make abbreviated information meaningful?. indeed, given local/Nation standards does authority wear a tourists head in having a different viewpoint as to what is reasonableness or simply punish tourists through the lack of clarity as to its own standards?.   

 

What is reasonableness given that the only car parking fascilities available have signage designating “only for the use of customers to shops x, y and z”，multiple owners of the parking spaces. Unreasonableness and entrapment is about an empty parking space belonging to another to which there is either insuffient or inappropriate awareness given whereas the opposite is one of no excuse in facing any penalties thus stated.