illegal clamping

[blackvelvet]

A year ago a private clamping company, clamped my car for none payment of tax.
The car however was on private land, and the clamp was removed, after I pointed this fact out to the clamping co.
The car is an item of historic interest, ( a classic cadillac ) and it was damaged in the process of clamping.
I have written numerous letters to the clampers, who first requested proof.
I supplied photos of the scratches and an estimate for repairs.
The firm now say they are not responsible, and refuse to discuss it further.
Have I any recourse? and how do I go about it.

[des8]

Re: illegal clamping

IMO if they damaged the vehicle they are liable for the repairs.
This applies to any one who causes damage to a third parties property, even if the vehicle is being legally removed the removers have to ensure they cause no damage..

If they aren't replying a letter before action may stir them into a response, if you are prepared to go to court.

[blackvelvet]

Re: illegal clamping

Thanks for the reply.
Who do I take to court.
I was advised earlier on the site, that I cannot sue a Gov department.
Is it of any use writing to the DVLA?

[des8]

Re: illegal clamping

I am surprised if you were advised that a UK gov. dept cannot be sued. You can sue government departments in the UK courts, and you can sue the UK government in the European Court of Human Rights, and in the European Court of Justice.

You cannot sue the government for certain things. You can't sue them just because you don't like government policy. You cannot sue them for failing to deliver on an election pledge (this has been tried before and failed, on the grounds that election promises are mere aspirations, and can change from day to day in different circumstances.)

You can sue the government for failing to protect your human rights under the European Convention on Human Rights, if you have exhausted all legal channels in the UK, in the European Court of Human Rights. If the case is successful, the UK must change its domestic law to comply with the ruling. The Human Rights Act 1998 tries to reduce the number of times the UK is in the dock, by incorporating the majority of the Convention into UK law, and making sure existing laws are interpreted in a way which complies with it.

People often sue the department for health, the ministry of defence, the home office etc.

The following government departments are listed in the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 as corporations which may be prosecuted criminally (and sued for negligence) for corporate manslaughter:
Assets Recovery Agency
Attorney General's Office
Cabinet Office
Central Office of Information
Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service
Crown Prosecution Service
Department for Communities and Local Government
Department for Constitutional Affairs (including the Scotland Office and the Wales Office)
Department for Culture, Media and Sport
Department for Education and Skills
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Department for International Development
Department for Transport
Department for Work and Pensions
Department of Health
Department of Trade and Industry
Export Credits Guarantee Department
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Forestry Commission
General Register Office for Scotland
Government Actuary's Department
Her Majesty's Land Registry
Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Her Majesty's Treasury
Home Office
Ministry of Defence
National Archives
National Archives of Scotland
National Audit Office
National Savings and Investments
National School of Government
Northern Ireland Audit Office
Northern Ireland Court Service
Northern Ireland Office
Office for National Statistics
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister
Office of Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Education and Training in Wales
Ordnance Survey
Privy Council Office
Public Prosecution Service for Northern Ireland
Registers of Scotland Executive Agency
Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office
Royal Mint
Scottish Executive
Serious Fraud Office
Treasury Solicitor's Department
UK Trade and Investment
Welsh Assembly Government

You can also sue a police force, which is a branch of the Home Office, a government department.

The above is what I understood , and to save typing have lifted it from elsewhere.

I am not suggesting you issue a county court claim as not enough is known about the circumstances of your complaint

[blackvelvet]

Re: illegal clamping

Good afternoon
Thank you for your email. Please be advised that you cannot issue a claim against a Government department.

Court clerks are not legally trained and cannot give advice on such matters. You may wish to seek legal advice or contact your local Citizen’s Advice Bureau with regards to your query.

Should you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Regards,

Elizabeth Gibbs

CCBC Emails Correspondence
Northampton County Court Bulk Centre
St Katharine’s House

thanks des8
this is the reply I got from you know who.

My car, an old cadillac, was wheel clamped outside my house by dvla agents - in the process the car was damaged, ie scratches (obviously caused by the clamp - he didn't have manoevring room, as there was little space between vehicles) & marks occurred in the paint where the labelling was adhered - my vehicle was on sorn & off road legally parked. I then had to produce proof that the land it was on was off road/private. This took time and money, as they wouldn't accept my word. They removed the clamp & I filmed this. I produced photographs of the damage & wrote to the clampers' firm. They denied any damage & refuse to discuss the matter further. To have the damage repaired, because it is a classic car, it is expensive. Where do I go from here? THANKS!

[des8]

Re: illegal clamping

Well you might like to refer Elizabeth Gibbs to the Crown Proceedings Act 1947 & CPR 66 for starters.
I note her letter states they are not legally trained and cannot give advice but writes "please be ADVISED you cannot issue a claim against a Government dept".
Perhaps you can sue her for erroneous advice

I appreciate what you say about classics. Others here know my only cars are classics (MGB GT & AC 2L Saloon).
Your difficulty is working out whom to proceed against. The DVLA as principal who are vicariously responsible for their agents actions, or the agents who actually caused the damage.
The DVLA might be easier, as they might be more prepared not to defend and just pay up.
Do note the "mights" as I really don't know which would be the easier target. Others here might have opinions they will share.
And you still have to prove who most probably caused the damage.

[stevemLS]

Re: illegal clamping

Isn't the convention to issue against the relevant Secretary of State?

[des8]

Re: illegal clamping

As the DVLA is a government agency and not a department I think the person named on a court claim will be the Chief Executive.

Before starting court proceeds it would be advisable to go through the DVLA's complaints procedure.
http://www.gov.uk/government/organis...ints-procedure
If nothing else it has the advantage of being free:tinysmile_grin_t: and if you end up in court a least you have tried ADR

[blackvelvet]

Re: illegal clamping

Thank you for the replies.
i will read the URL above and investigate further.

[blackvelvet]

Re: illegal clamping

thanks again des 8.for the URL.
Just looked at the GOV site.
I will try to get some sense from them.:tinysmile_grin_t:

[righty]

Re: illegal clamping

I would suggest that you would need to sue the clampers who actually caused the damage before looking to the DVLA to sort it

[des8]

Re: illegal clamping

I'm not sure that you're correct there Righty.
If it comes down to suing someone (and I would still try and avoid that by going via DVLA complaints procedures) where there is the possibility of multiple tortfeasors it is important to
chose the one most advantageous to the claimant.
If the wrong defendant is selected, no damages!
If both are selected but you only win against one, your damages could be wiped out by adverse costs awarded to the other.(probably n/a if small claims).
The factors that need to be considered include potential legal liability (including questions of the merits of the case against each defendant, and vicarious liability,
The vicarious liability test is akin to employer/employee relationship:
i) employer more likely to be able to compensate victim (carries insurance)
ii)the tort committed whilst employee acting on behalf of employer on employer's business
iii)the employer created the risk of the tort by instructing the employee to carry out that particular activity
iv)The employee is to some extent under the control of the employer

If you were to proceed against the clampers I just wonder if they could point the finger at DVLA (they's the boss, they made me do it).
Could they raise a defence on the basis that the DVLA was the principal, and as agents they the clampers were not liable as they were on DVLA business?
Anyone like to comment?

1. 1. 
      

[righty]

Re: illegal clamping

Name them both in the application I would then they can fight it out between themselves as to liability. This is important if the claimant doesn't know wether or not the DVLA indemnifies the clampers for any incidental damage they may cause